KK - WRP Part 1

Watershed Restoration Plan
Kinnickinnic River
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED RESTORATION PLAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................ 1-1
1.1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2
Key Elements of the Kinnickinnic River Watershed Restoration Plan ........................... 1-1
1.3
Watershed Restoration Plan Development and Findings................................................. 1-5

1.3.1
Key Focus Areas Identified During the Watershed Restoration Plan Planning
Process ............................................................................................................... 1-5
1.3.2
Baseline Year 2000 Conditions ......................................................................... 1-6
1.3.3
Management Strategies to Achieve Goals ......................................................... 1-7
1.3.4
Expected Benefits .............................................................................................. 1-7
1.3.5
Prioritization of Actions .................................................................................... 1-8
1.3.6
Other Pollutants ............................................................................................... 1-13
1.3.7
Implementation and Monitoring ...................................................................... 1-13
1.3.8
Policy Issues .................................................................................................... 1-13
Tables
1-1
Public Health Targets and Foundation Actions ............................................................... 1-9
1-2
Habitat and Aesthetics Targets and Foundation Actions ............................................... 1-11
1-3
Nutrients Targets and Foundation Actions .................................................................... 1-12
Figures
1-1
Water Quality Assessment Point Areas within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed ........ 1-2
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 2: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 2-1

2.1
Purpose of the Watershed Restoration Plan ..................................................................... 2-1
2.2
Pathway to the Watershed Restoration Plan .................................................................... 2-1
2.3
2.2.1
The Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update and the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage Districts 2020 Facilities Planning Process
(2002-2007) ....................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2.2
Forging a New Path ........................................................................................... 2-2
Plan Implementation Considerations ............................................................................... 2-3

2.3.1
Consideration of Total Maximum Daily Load Analyses .................................. 2-3
2.3.2
Third Party Total Maximum Daily Loads and NR 151..................................... 2-4
2.3.3
Third Party Total Maximum Daily Loads and the Clean Water Act ................ 2-5
2.3.4
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Nonpoint Pollution Program Wis.

Admin. Code Natural Resources (NR) 151 Runoff Management ...................... 2-6
2.4
Pathway Decision............................................................................................................. 2-6
2.5
Development of the Watershed Restoration Plan .......................................................... 2-10
2.6
2.5.1
Overview ......................................................................................................... 2-10
2.5.2
Detailed Tasks ................................................................................................. 2-12
Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2-13
Tables
2-1
Impact of NR 151 on Modeled Total Suspended Solids for the Kinnickinnic River ...... 2-8
Figures
2-1
Annual Bacteria Load Percentages by Source Category to the Kinnickinnic River

Watershed Year 2000 Conditions ................................................................................. 2-2
2-2
What Pathways Exist for Progress? ................................................................................. 2-3
2-3
Framework for the Kinnickinnic River Watershed Restoration Plan .............................. 2-9
Appendices
2A
Integrated Watershed Implementation Planning Meeting Agenda
2B
Water Quality Data Existing 2000 and Revised 2020 Baseline with and without NR 151
ii
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 3: BUILD PARTNERSHIPS ................................................................................ 3-1

3.1
Stakeholders for the Watershed Restoration Plan ............................................................ 3-1
3.2
Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. .............................................................. 3-2
3.3
3.4
3.2.1
Executive Steering Council ............................................................................... 3-3
3.2.2
Science Committee, Modeling, and Habitat Subcommittees ............................ 3-4
3.2.3
Watershed Action Teams .................................................................................. 3-6
3.2.4
Policy Committee .............................................................................................. 3-6
Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. Linked Goals (concurrent with Regional
Water Quality Management Plan Update Pollutant Reduction Goals) ............................ 3-7
3.3.1
Watershed Action Team Visioning Session .................................................... 3-10
3.3.2
Watershed Restoration Plan Focus Areas ....................................................... 3-12
3.3.3
Habitat Considerations .................................................................................... 3-13
Education and Outreach ................................................................................................. 3-13

3.4.1
Internet............................................................................................................. 3-13
3.4.2
Watershed Booklets ......................................................................................... 3-14
3.4.3
Annual Conference .......................................................................................... 3-14
3.4.4
Other Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. Education and Outreach

Initiatives ......................................................................................................... 3-15
Figures
3-1 Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. Members ................................................. 3-2
Appendices
3A
Invited Participants - KK Watershed Action Team
3B
Participants - KK Watershed Action Team
iii
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 4: CHARACTERIZE THE WATERSHED ....................................................... 4-1

4.1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2
Overview of Habitat Conditions within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed ................... 4-1
4.3
Habitat Assessment within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed ....................................... 4-8
4.4
Water Quality and Pollutant Loading within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed ......... 4-22
4.5
Assessment Point Areas (Subwatersheds) ..................................................................... 4-25

4.5.1
Lyons Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-1) .................................................. 4-25
4.5.2
South 43rd Street Ditch (Assessment Point KK-2) .......................................... 4-41
4.5.3
Kinnickinnic River Mainstem (Assessment Point KK-3) ............................... 4-56
4.5.4
Wilson Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-4) ................................................ 4-73
4.5.5
Holmes Avenue Creek (Assessment Point KK-5) .......................................... 4-88
4.5.6
Villa Mann Creek (Assessment Point KK-6) ................................................ 4-103
4.5.7
Cherokee Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-7) ........................................... 4-118
4.5.8
Wilson Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-8) .............................................. 4-133
4.5.9
Kinnickinnic River Mainstem (Assessment Points KK-9 and KK-10) ........ 4-150
Tables
4-1
Approximate Percentage of Connected Impervious Surfaces Created by Urban

Development .................................................................................................................... 4-6
4-2
Physical and Biological Conditions ............................................................................... 4-11
4-3
Aggregated Bioassessment Results................................................................................ 4-17
4-4
Fish Species Composition .............................................................................................. 4-21
4-5
Total Baseline Assessment Point Areas Loads .............................................................. 4-24
Lyons Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-1)

4-6
Land Use in the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) ............................. 4-26
4-7
Civil Divisions in the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) .................... 4-29
4-8
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-1) ............................................................................................................................ 4-34
4-9
Baseline Loads for the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) (Units /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-35
4-10
Baseline Loads for the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) (Percent) ... 4-35
4-11
Baseline Loads for the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) (Units / Acre /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-36
iv
Kinnickinnic River
4-12
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality at the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-1) ............................................................................................................................ 4-38
4-13
Year 2020 Loads for the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) (Units /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-39
4-14
Year 2020 Loads for the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) (Percent) 4-39
4-15
Year 2020 Loads for the Lyons Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-1) (Units / Acre /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-40
South 43rd Street Ditch (Assessment Point KK-2)

4-16
Land Use in the South 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area (KK-2) .................... 4-42
4-17
Civil Divisions in the South 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area (KK-2) ........... 4-44
4-18
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the South 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area
(KK-2) ............................................................................................................................ 4-49
4-19
Baseline Loads for the 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area (KK-2) (Units /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-50
4-20
Baseline Loads for the 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area (KK-2) (Percent) .... 4-50
4-21
Baseline Loads for the 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area (KK-2) (Units / Acre /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-51
4-22
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the South 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point
Area (KK-2) ................................................................................................................... 4-53
4-23
Year 2020 Loads for the South 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area (KK-2) (Units /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-54
4-24
Year 2020 Loads for the South 43rd Street Ditch Assessment Point Area (KK-2)
(Percent) ......................................................................................................................... 4-54
4-25
Year 2020 Loads for the South 43rd Street Assessment Point Area (KK-2) (Units / Acre /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-55
Kinnickinnic River Mainstem (Assessment Point KK-3)

4-26
Land Use in the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area (KK-3) .......... 4-57
4-27
Civil Divisions in the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area (KK-3).. 4-59
4-28
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point
Area (KK-3) ................................................................................................................... 4-64
4-29
Baseline Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area (KK-3)
(Units / Year) ................................................................................................................. 4-65
4-30
(Percent) ......................................................................................................................... 4-65
4-31
(Units / Acre / Year) ...................................................................................................... 4-66
Kinnickinnic River
4-32
Baseline Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area
(KK-3) (Units / Year)..................................................................................................... 4-66
4-33
(KK-3) (Percent) ............................................................................................................ 4-67
4-34
(KK-3) (Units / Acre / Year) .......................................................................................... 4-67
4-35
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment
Point Area (KK-3).......................................................................................................... 4-69
4-36
Year 2020 Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area (KK-3)
(Units / Year) ................................................................................................................. 4-70
4-37
(Percent) ......................................................................................................................... 4-70
4-38
(Units / Acre / Year) ...................................................................................................... 4-71
4-39
Year 2020 Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point
Area (KK-3) (Units / Year) ............................................................................................ 4-71
4-40
Area (KK-3) (Percent) ................................................................................................... 4-72
4-41
Area (KK-3) (Units / Acre / Year) ................................................................................. 4-72
Wilson Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-4)

4-42
Land Use in the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4) ............................ 4-74
4-43
Civil Divisions in the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4) ................... 4-76
4-44
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-4) ............................................................................................................................ 4-81
4-45
Baseline Load for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4) (Units /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-82
4-46
Baseline Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4) (Percent) . 4-82
4-47
Baseline Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4) (Units / Acre /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-83
4-48
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-4) ............................................................................................................................ 4-85
4-49
Year 2020 Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4) (Units /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-86
4-50
Year 2020 Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4)
(Percent) ......................................................................................................................... 4-86
vi
4-51
Kinnickinnic River
Year 2020 Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-4) (Units / Acre
/ Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-87
Holmes Avenue Creek (Assessment Point KK-5)

4-52
Land Use in the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5) ...................... 4-89
4-53
Civil Divisions in the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5) ............. 4-91
4-54
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-5) ............................................................................................................................ 4-96
4-55
Baseline Loads for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5) (Units /
Year) .............................................................................................................................. 4-97
4-56
Baseline Loads for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5)
(Percent) ......................................................................................................................... 4-97
4-57
Baseline Loads for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5) (Units /
Acre / Year).................................................................................................................... 4-98
4-58
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-5) .......................................................................................................................... 4-100
4-59
Year 2020 Loads for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-101
4-60
Year 2020 Loads for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5)
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-101
4-61
Year 2020 Loads for the Holmes Avenue Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-5) (Units /
Acre / Year).................................................................................................................. 4-102
Villa Mann Creek (Assessment Point KK-6)

4-62
Land Use in the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-6) ........................... 4-104
4-63
Civil Divisions in the Villa Mann Assessment Point Area (KK-6) ............................. 4-106
4-64
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK6) .................................................................................................................................. 4-111
4-65
Baseline Loads for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-6) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-112
4-66
Baseline Loads for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-6) (Percent) . 4-112
4-67
Baseline Loads for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-6) (Units / Acre /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-113
4-68
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-6) .......................................................................................................................... 4-115
4-69
Year 2020 Loads for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-6) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-116
4-70
Year 2020 Loads for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-6)
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-116
vii
4-71
Kinnickinnic River
Year 2020 Loads for the Villa Mann Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-6) (Units / Acre /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-117
Cherokee Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-7)

4-72
Land Use in the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7) ...................... 4-119
4-73
Civil Divisions in the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7) ............. 4-121
4-74
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-7) .......................................................................................................................... 4-126
4-75
Baseline Loads for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-127
4-76
Baseline Loads for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7)
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-127
4-77
Baseline Loads for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7) (Units /
Acre / Year).................................................................................................................. 4-128
4-78
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-7) .......................................................................................................................... 4-130
4-79
Year 2020 Loads for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-131
4-80
Year 2020 Loads for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7)
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-131
4-81
Year 2020 Loads for the Cherokee Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-7) (Units /
Acre / Year).................................................................................................................. 4-132

4-82
Land Use in the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8) .......................... 4-134
4-83
Civil Divisions in the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8) ................. 4-136
4-84
Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK8) .................................................................................................................................. 4-141
4-85
Baseline Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-142
4-86
Baseline Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8) (Percent) 4-142
4-87
Baseline Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8) (Units / Acre /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-143
4-88
Baseline Cumulative Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8)
(Units / Year) ............................................................................................................... 4-143
4-89
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-144
4-90
(Units / Acre / Year) .................................................................................................... 4-144
viii
Kinnickinnic River
4-91
Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area
(KK-8) .......................................................................................................................... 4-146
4-92
Year 2020 Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-147
4-93
Year 2020 Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8)
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-147
4-94
Year 2020 Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8) (Units / Acre
/ Year) .......................................................................................................................... 4-148
4-95
Year 2020 Cumulative Loads for the Wilson Park Creek Assessment Point Area (KK-8)
(Units / Year) ............................................................................................................... 4-148
4-96
Percent) ........................................................................................................................ 4-149
4-97
(Units /Acre / Year) ..................................................................................................... 4-149
Kinnickinnic River Mainstem (Assessment Points KK-9 and KK-10)

4-98
Land Use in the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area KK-9 ........... 4-151
4-99
Civil Divisions in the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area

(KK-9) .......................................................................................................................... 4-153
4-100 Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Kinnickinnic River Assessment Point Area (KK9) .................................................................................................................................. 4-159
4-101 Baseline Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point (KK-9) (Units /
Year) ............................................................................................................................ 4-160
4-102 Baseline Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point (KK-9)
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-160
4-103 Baseline Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point (KK-9) (Units /
Acre / Year).................................................................................................................. 4-161
4-104 Baseline Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point (KK9) (Units / Year) ........................................................................................................... 4-161
4-105 Baseline Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point (KK9) (Percent)................................................................................................................... 4-162
4-106 Baseline Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point (KK9) (Units /Acre / Year) ................................................................................................. 4-162
4-107 Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Kinnickinnic River Assessment Point Area
(KK-9) .......................................................................................................................... 4-164
4-108 Year 2020 Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Assessment Point Area (KK-9) (Units /
Acre) ............................................................................................................................ 4-165
4-109 Year 2020 Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Assessment Point Area (KK-9)
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-165
ix
Kinnickinnic River
4-110 Year 2020 Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Assessment Point Area (KK-9) (Units / Acre
/Year) ........................................................................................................................... 4-166
4-111 Year 2020 Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Assessment Point Area (KK-9)
(Units / Year) ............................................................................................................... 4-166
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-167
(Units / Acre /Year) ..................................................................................................... 4-167
4-114 Land Use in the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area (KK-10) ...... 4-169
4-115 Civil Divisions in the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area
(KK-10) ........................................................................................................................ 4-169
4-116 Modeled Baseline Water Quality for the Kinnickinnic River Assessment Point Area (KK10) ................................................................................................................................ 4-178
4-117 Baseline Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area (KK-10)
(Units / Year) ............................................................................................................... 4-179
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-179
(Units / Acre / Year) .................................................................................................... 4-180
4-120 Baseline Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area
(KK-10) (Units / Year)................................................................................................. 4-180
(KK-10) (Percent) ........................................................................................................ 4-181
(KK-10) (Units / Acre / Year) ...................................................................................... 4-181
4-123 Modeled Year 2020 Water Quality for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment
Point Area (KK-10)...................................................................................................... 4-183
4-124 Year 2020 Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point Area (KK-10)
(Units / Year) ............................................................................................................... 4-184
(Percent) ....................................................................................................................... 4-184
(Units / Acre / Year) .................................................................................................... 4-185
4-127 Year 2020 Cumulative Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Mainstem Assessment Point
Area (KK-10) (Units / Year) ........................................................................................ 4-185
Area (KK-10) (Percent) ............................................................................................... 4-186
Kinnickinnic River
Area (KK-10) (Units / Acre / Year) ............................................................................. 4-186
Figures
4-1
Habitat Assessment Point Areas within the Kinnickinnic Watershed ............................. 4-3
4-2
Hydrograph Comparison Urban and Rural Streams ..................................................... 4-7
4-3
Infiltration and Streambank Protection .......................................................................... 4-13
4-4
Relationship Between Biota and Urbanization .............................................................. 4-15
4-5
Interactions of Land Use, Stream Characteristics and Habitat ...................................... 4-16
4-6
Concrete Removal / Floodplain Restoration Example................................................... 4-19
4-7
KK Watershed Assessment Point Area.......................................................................... 4-27
4-8
Land Use Map: KK-1..................................................................................................... 4-28
4-9
KK-1 Daily Fecal Coliform Concentrations .................................................................. 4-31
4-10
KK-1 Monthly Fecal Coliform Concentrations ............................................................. 4-32
4-11
KK-1 Flow Based Fecal Coliform Concentrations ........................................................ 4-33
4-12
Land Use Map: KK-2..................................................................................................... 4-43
4-13
4-14
4-15
4-16
Land Use Map: KK-3..................................................................................................... 4-58
4-17
4-18
4-19
4-20
Land Use Map: KK-4..................................................................................................... 4-75
4-21
4-22
4-23
4-24
Land Use Map: KK-5..................................................................................................... 4-90
4-25
4-26
4-27
4-28
Land Use Map: KK-6................................................................................................... 4-105
4-29
KK-6 Daily Fecal Coliform Concentrations ................................................................ 4-108
xi
Kinnickinnic River
4-30
KK-6 Monthly Fecal Coliform Concentrations ........................................................... 4-109
4-31
KK-6 Flow Based Fecal Coliform Concentrations ...................................................... 4-110
4-32
Land Use Map: KK-7................................................................................................... 4-120
4-33
4-34
4-35
4-36
Land Use Map: KK-8................................................................................................... 4-135
4-37
4-38
4-39
4-40
Land Use Map: KK-9................................................................................................... 4-152
4-41
4-42
4-43
4-44
KK-9 Flow Based Chloride Concentrations ................................................................ 4-158
4-45
Land Use Map: KK-10................................................................................................. 4-170
4-46
KK-10 Daily Fecal Coliform Concentrations .............................................................. 4-174
4-47
KK-10 Monthly Fecal Coliform Concentrations ......................................................... 4-175
4-48
KK-10 Flow Based Fecal Coliform Concentrations .................................................... 4-176
4-49
KK-10 Flow Based Chloride Concentrations .............................................................. 4-177
Appendices
4A
Stream Habitat Conditions and Biological Assessment of the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee
River Watersheds: 2000-2009
4B
Water Quality Model Refinement Memo
4C
Fact Sheets
4D
Ranked Loads for the Kinnickinnic River Watershed
xii
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 5: IDENTIFY SOLUTIONS AND DEVELOP MANAGEMENT

STRATEGIES TO ACHIEVE GOALS................................................................................... 5-1
5.1
Goals Identified in the Watershed Planning Effort .......................................................... 5-1
5.2
Management Strategies to Achieve Goals ....................................................................... 5-4
5.3
Existing Regulatory Management Strategies to Achieve Goals ...................................... 5-5

5.3.1
Details on the Existing Regulatory Management Strategies to Achieve Goals 5-8
5.3.2
Existing Point Source Control Regulations ....................................................... 5-8
5.3.3
Existing Nonpoint Source Regulatory Programs .............................................. 5-9
5.4
Other Management Strategies in Various Stages of Implementation ............................ 5-14
5.5
Management Strategies Recommended for Implementation in the Regional Water Quality

Management Plan Update but not yet Implemented ...................................................... 5-24
5.6
Summary ........................................................................................................................ 5-28
Tables
5-1
Summary of Existing Regulatory Management Strategies (FPOPS) to Achieve Goals .... 5-6
5-2 Other Management Strategies in Various Stages of Implementation ............................... 5-15

5-3 Management Strategies Recommended for Implementation in the Regional Water Quality
Management Plan Update but not yet Implemented ......................................................... 5-25
Appendices
5A
A Fresh Look at Road Salt: Widespread Aquatic Toxicity and Water Quality Impacts on
Local, Regional, and National Scales
5B
SWWT Membership
5C
Local Governmental Management Agency Designations and Selected Responsibilities and

Prioritization for the Point Source Pollution Abatement Element of the Recommended
Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update for the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds
xiii
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 6: ESTIMATE THE LOAD REDUCTIONS AND OTHER BENEFITS

EXPECTED FROM MANAGEMENT MEASURES ................................................... 6-1
6.1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2
Expected Load Reductions from the Regional Water Quality Management Plan
Update .............................................................................................................................. 6-1
6.2.1
Committed Programs ......................................................................................... 6-7
6.2.2
Other Management Strategies in Various Stages of Implementation ............. 6-10
6.2.3
Management Strategies Recommended for Implementation in the Regional

Water Quality Management Plan Update, but Not Yet Implemented ............. 6-16
6.3
Prioritization of Management Measures ........................................................................ 6-18
6.4
Water Quality Improvements Estimated with the Regional Water Quality Management
Plan Update .................................................................................................................... 6-18
6.5
Allocations ..................................................................................................................... 6-21
Tables
6-1
Projected Effectiveness of Actions Planned Prior to the Initiation of the Watershed

Restoration Plan .................................................................................................................. 6-3
6-2 Effectiveness of Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update Recommended

Actions ................................................................................................................................ 6-6
6-3 Scoring of Water Quality Conditions in the Kinnickinnic River...................................... 6-20
Figures
6-1 Projected Annual Loads by Parameter for the Major Components of the Regional Water
Quality Management Plan Update ...................................................................................... 6-4
6-2 Percent Reduction in Annual Loads by Parameter for the Major Components of the
Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update, Relative to the Baseline .................... 6-5
xiv
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 7: ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES AND IDENTIFICATION

OFPRIORITY ACTIONS ......................................................................................................... 7-1
7.1
Additional Management Strategies .................................................................................. 7-1
7.2
7.1.1
Committed Programs ........................................................................................ 7-1
7.1.2
Additional Management Strategies in Various Stages of Implementation ....... 7-3
7.1.3
Additional Management Strategies Recommended for Implementation but

Not Yet Implemented ........................................................................................ 7-5
Identification of Priority Actions ..................................................................................... 7-5
7.3
7.2.1
Priority Actions to Address Public Health/Bacteria (Table 7-1) .................... 7-11
7.2.2
Priority Actions to Address Land-based Habitat (Table 7-2) ......................... 7-17
7.2.3
Priority Actions to Address In-stream-based Habitat (Table 7-3) .................. 7-21
7.2.4
Priority Actions to Address Nutrients/Phosphorus (Table 7-4) ...................... 7-24
7.2.5
Foundation Actions (Table 7-5) ...................................................................... 7-26
Comments Received on Priority Actions Tables ........................................................... 7-28
Tables
7-1
Priority Actions to Address Public Health/Bacteria ......................................................... 7-15
7-2 Priority Actions to Address Land-based Measures ........................................................... 7-18

7-3 Priority Actions to Address In-stream-based Measures.................................................... 7-22
7-4 Priority Actions to Address Nutrients/Phosphorus ........................................................... 7-25
7-5 Foundation Actions ........................................................................................................... 7-27
Figures
7-1 Priority Actions Development and Presentation ................................................................. 7-6
7-2 Habitat Assessment Point Areas within the Kinnickinnic River ...................................... 7-13
Appendices
7A
Planning for Riparian and Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat
xv
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENT AND MONITOR PROGRESS - KINNICKINNIC

RIVER WATERSHED.............................................................................................................. 8-1
8.1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 8-1
8.2
Phase 1 and Phase 2 Actions ............................................................................................ 8-3
8.3
8.2.1
Completed or Committed Actions .................................................................... 8-3
8.2.2
Watershed Restoration Plan Action Plan for Actions Underway

or Initiated ....................................................................................................... 8-20
8.2.3
New Actions - How to Begin the Process (Implementation Measures) ......... 8-21
8.2.4
Implementation Schedule and Process ............................................................ 8-23
Potential Funding Sources ............................................................................................. 8-23

8.3.1
Local Governments ......................................................................................... 8-23
8.3.2
State Governments .......................................................................................... 8-25
8.3.3
Federal Government........................................................................................ 8-25
8.3.4
Detailed Data on Federal Funding Source ...................................................... 8-26
8.3.5
Private ............................................................................................................. 8-27
8.3.6
Funding Summary........................................................................................... 8-27
8.4
Watershed Policy Issues ................................................................................................ 8-27
8.5
Post-Implementation Monitoring ................................................................................... 8-28
8.6
8.5.1
Use of Adaptive Management ........................................................................ 8-28
8.5.2
Measuring Success .......................................................................................... 8-28
8.5.3
Data Gaps ........................................................................................................ 8-29
8.5.4
Implementation Monitoring ............................................................................ 8-30
8.5.5
Effectiveness Monitoring ................................................................................ 8-30
Progress Evaluation and Refinement ............................................................................. 8-30
Tables
8-1
Recently Completed Actions .............................................................................................. 8-3
8-2 Underway (Action is Funded and Underway) .................................................................... 8-4

8-3 Initialed Actions ................................................................................................................ 8-10
8-4 Future Actions Recommended in the Watershed Restoration Plan for the
Kinnickinnic River Watershed .......................................................................................... 8-12
8-5 Action Plan Steps for Actions Underway (Table 8-2) or Initiated (Table 8-3) ................ 8-20
8-6 Action Plan Steps for New Actions (Tables 8-3 and 8-4) ................................................ 8-21
xvi
Kinnickinnic River
8-7 Funding Program Name: Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants (319 Program) ........ 8-26
Figures
8-1 WRP Action Plan for new Actions/Projects ..................................................................... 8-24
Appendices
8A Appendix U: Potential Funding Programs to Implement Plan Recommendations. A
Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update for the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds
(SEWRPC, 2007)
8B
8C
White Paper/Analysis for Watershed-Based Permitting Primer

Sweetwater Trust Water Quality Trading Subcommittee Policy Recommendations (3-2-10
Draft)
xvii
Kinnickinnic River
Chapter 1: Kinnickinnic River Watershed Restoration Plan

Executive Summary
1.1
Introduction
The primary purpose of this Watershed Restoration Plan (WRP) is to identify specific actions
that can be implemented between 2010 and 2015 to improve water quality within the
Kinnickinnic River and its tributaries and present general recommendations for activity beyond
2015. These actions have been identified based upon a consideration of many factors, including
overall effectiveness, scientific underpinning, regulatory considerations, and stakeholder goals.
This WRP describes the characteristics of the Kinnickinnic River and its watershed, focusing on
those topics that are directly related to implementation (Figure 1-1). Information provided
includes existing (Baseline Year 2000) and Year 2020 land uses, Baseline Year 2000 and Year
2020 water quality conditions, and the most significant sources of pollution. Water quality goals
selected by the Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. (SWWT), based upon scientific,
regulatory, and stakeholder considerations, are also presented and explained, as are the load
reductions that will be needed to meet those goals. The reductions are based upon projected
loads for the Year 2020 and as such account for future growth.
This WRP is the culmination of historical and recent activity to protect and restore water quality
within the greater Milwaukee region. Most significantly, it builds upon the Southeastern
Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) Regional Water Quality Management
Plan Update (RWQMPU) and Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) 2020
Facilities Plan and incorporates the input from members of the SWWT and its associated
Kinnickinnic River Watershed Action Team (WAT) and Science Committee.
1.2
Key Elements of the Kinnickinnic River Watershed Restoration Plan
This WRP follows the Clean Water Act guidelines for developing effective watershed plans. As
such, this WRP includes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys (USEPA) nine elements
required to be addressed in watershed plans, described in the USEPAs Handbook for
Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect our Waters.1 The USEPAs nine key
elements are discussed below along with a reference to and a description of this WRPs chapters
and appendices that most directly correspond to each key element.
1) Identification of causes and sources to be controlled
Chapter 4: Characterize the Watershed presents a detailed accounting of significant point
and nonpoint sources (broken down by land use) within the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
The chapters maps, descriptions, and tables provide data on the Kinnickinnic River
watersheds setting and pollutant loading as well as impacts to water quality and water
quality standards.
USEPA, Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect our Waters,
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/watershed_handbook/pdf/ch02.pdf, EPA 841-B-08-002 (March 2008)
1-1
Kinnickinnic River
1-2
Kinnickinnic River
2) Estimation of load reductions

This key element is addressed in Chapter 6: Estimate the Load Reductions and Other
Benefits Expected from Management Measures. Chapter 6 estimates the load reductions of
the major components of the RWQMPU. The chapter also examines the effectiveness of
planned management actions that are generally linked to specific land use classifications
utilized in key element 1 described above. Chapter 6 also describes the management
measures that will be needed to achieve load reductions and improve water quality in the
Kinnickinnic River watershed. Chapter 4: Characterize the Watershed provides detailed
estimates of future loads for the specific land use classifications within the watershed.
3) Description of nonpoint source pollution management measures
Chapter 5: Identify Solutions and Develop Management Strategies to Achieve Goals
addresses this element. Chapter 5 presents management strategies to address both point and
nonpoint sources. These strategies are grouped into three categories: existing regulatory
strategies, management strategies currently being implemented, and management strategies
recommended for implementation in the RWQMPU. In addition to bacteria and nutrients,
Chapter 5 also presents management actions to improve habitat within the Kinnickinnic
River watershed. Appendix 5A presents a discussion of road salt and includes management
measures. Chapter 7: Additional Management Strategies and Identification of Priority
Actions identifies additional actions that were not included in the RWQMPU and prioritizes
actions and identifies land uses and assessment point areas that should be targeted to meet
the goals of this WRP. Note the Kinnickinnic River watershed assessment point areas are
depicted on Figure 1-1. Appendices 4A, 4C and 4D of Chapter 4 present detailed data to
support the prioritized actions discussed in Chapter 7. Appendix 4A presents SEWRPCs
Memorandum Report 194, which includes an assessment of habitat conditions in the
Kinnickinnic River watershed, Appendix 4C includes detailed factsheets for each
assessment point (see element 5 below for description of the factsheets), and Appendix 4D
presents specific data for each assessment point and ranks the assessment point areas by
pollutant load. Appendix 7A includes a discussion of planning considerations for improved
habitat and biodiversity.
4) Estimates of required technical and financial assistance
This element is addressed in Chapter 8: Implementation Strategy and Appendices 8A-C.
Chapter 8 discusses funding sources and programs, critical participants, and data gaps. The
chapter emphasizes the importance of addressing the data gaps to implement specific
restoration activities. The chapter also addresses outstanding policy issues that need to be
resolved prior to implementation. Appendices 5B and 5C present SWWT participants and
selected responsibilities for elements of the RWQMPU.
5) Description of information/education program
This element is addressed in Chapter 3: Building Partnerships. Chapter 3 and Appendices
3A and 3B profile the SWWT and the WAT. The SWWT is ideally suited for outreach as it
comprises a diverse suite of members and was formed to improve water quality within the
greater Milwaukee watersheds (GMW). Appendix 4C contains factsheets, including maps,
tables, and descriptions of the Baseline Year 2000 conditions of each assessment point area
within the Kinnickinnic River watershed. The factsheets were developed to enhance the
1-3
Kinnickinnic River
publics understanding of and connection to the Kinnickinnic River watershed and will
assist with implementation.
6) Implementation schedule
Chapter 7: Additional Management Strategies and Identification of Priority Actions
addresses the schedule element. To enhance stakeholder understanding and the potential for
improved water quality and habitat, this WRP distills future actions into priority action
tables for each focus area. The chapter also presents a foundation action table that lists the
predecessor actions that should be implemented to realize the full potential of subsequent
actions. Chapter 7s tables suggest actions that should be implemented over the next five
years to continue improving water quality within the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
Chapter 8: Implementation Strategy also directly speaks to the schedule element. Chapter 8
presents an overview of this WRPs implementation process and includes timeframes for
actions.
7) Description of interim, measureable milestones
This element is primarily concerned with measuring implementation. Measures of
effectiveness and benefits to water quality are primarily addressed in element 8 below. This
milestone element is addressed primarily in Chapter 8: Implementation Strategy. Chapter
8 contains discussion of action plan steps and implementation measures that are required for
actions, including actions that have been initiated and those that are planned. Chapter 7:
Additional Management Strategies and Identification of Priority Actions also addresses this
element. Chapter 7 presents a discussion of the watershed planning process and interim
milestones, referred to as targets in this WRP.
8) Description of criteria to determine whether load reductions are achieved
The criteria element is discussed in multiple chapters. Chapter 4: Characterize the
Watershed utilizes projections of population and land use as well as management strategies
to estimate future loads. Based on future loads, Chapter 6: Estimate the Load Reductions
and Other Benefits from Management Measures estimates future water quality throughout
the Kinnickinnic River watershed. In terms of habitat improvements, Chapter 3: Building
Partnerships presents a comprehensive discussion of the stakeholders criteria for
improvements to habitat within the watershed. Chapter 8: Implementation Strategy
incorporates discussions of criteria within the context of post implementation monitoring
including adaptive management, success measurement, implementation and effectiveness
monitoring as well as progress evaluation and recalibration
9) Monitoring component to evaluate effectiveness of implementation
The monitoring element is addressed in Chapter 8: Implementation Strategy. In addition to
summarizing the status of all of the various water quality and habitat-based actions that have
been recently completed, are underway, initiated or are planned or recommended, Chapter 8
of this WRP also includes discussions of post-implementation monitoring and progress
evaluation and recalibration.
In summary, this WRP uses the watershed planning process found in the federal program
guidance for Section 319 of the Clean Water Act and the specific recommended actions are
based upon those recommended in the RWQMPU. This WRP is intended to be a flexible
1-4
Kinnickinnic River
document and as it is implemented, new information/data, technologies, and water quality

measures may form the basis for future revisions.
1.3
Watershed Restoration Plan Development and Findings
1.3.1 Key Focus Areas Identified During the Watershed Restoration Plan Planning
Process
Through the stakeholder input of the SWWT, three major focus areas emerged for this WRP:
bacteria/public health, habitat, and nutrients/phosphorous. These focus areas reflect the linkage
between water quality parameters and water usage in the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
a. Bacteria/Public Health
Fecal coliform bacteria are an indicator of pathogens, or microscopic organisms that can make
people sick. The WAT and the Science Committee agreed that public health should be a top
priority of this WRP. High levels of fecal coliform are more of a concern during warm
weather months because that is when people contact the water in the stream the most. One of
the biggest concerns in the Kinnickinnic River watershed is the unknown sources of fecal
coliform.
b. Habitat/Aesthetics
The WAT and Science Committee stressed that habitat issues include physical features as
well as water quality components. Physical features, such as concrete-lined channels and
restoration of watersheds with buffers are important, but the consensus was that this WRP
should consider a wide range of habitat-based parameters. This WRP acknowledges that
aesthetic improvement does not always relate directly to water quality or habitat
improvement, but in many cases they are linked. The major habitat considerations are
summarized below:
Manmade channels/concrete channels - The WAT and Science Committee suggested
that concrete linings be removed and stream channels be naturalized. Other suggestions
include removing streams from enclosed conduit (stream daylighting), erosion control,
aesthetics and re-introduction of stream meanders. While daylighting streams and
introducing meanders would immediately improve habitat along the stream, potential
impacts to public safety and flooding need to be considered.
In-stream conditions - The WAT and Science Committee made suggestions regarding
improvements to in-stream conditions. Note that at the request of the SWWT Science
Committee, SEWRPC staff assessed habitat conditions and provided recommendations to
address habitat issues of concern from the perspective of both the land-based and instream-based conditions, and were distinguished as such. For a complete summary of
biological and habitat conditions from year 2000 to 2009 as well as the recommended
prioritization strategy and priority actions see Appendix 4A (SEWRPC MR-194).
Examples of the habitat-based considerations include the following:
Eliminate barriers to fish passage (add fish ladders)
Reduce litter via programs (i.e., source control)
Introduce environmentally-friendly sheet piling and bulkheads
Reduce algae blooms
1-5
Kinnickinnic River
Remove sediment island south of Lincoln Avenue (if not natural)

Limit motor boat use upstream of Becher Street
Increase diversity and complexity to the system
Riparian areas The lands adjacent to the Kinnickinnic River stream banks protect and
buffer the stream from pollutants. To maximize their protective benefits, the WAT
suggested that riparian areas be kept vegetated and native vegetation should be managed
to enhance biological diversity. Riparian areas should be expanded to a minimum of 120
feet and structures should be removed from riparian areas that are located within the
floodplain. Other WAT suggestions for improving riparian areas along the Kinnickinnic
River include the following:
Construct, treat and restore wetlands
Improve public access to the river; mandate public access with any new
development (indirect improvement through increased recreational use and
awareness of the river)
Implement mandates to address imperviousness with new development and
redevelopment
Remove coal pile at the port or provide a buffer between the pile and the river (if
possible)
Create more trails along river
Implement geese management and gull management, if applicable
In-stream and riparian areas:
Restore native species and remove invasive species
Use less road salt
c. Nutrients/Phosphorus
In-stream phosphorus concentrations vary throughout the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
While there do not appear to be many problems with algal growth within the watershed,
phosphorus has been identified as an issue along the nearshore area of Lake Michigan.
1.3.2 Baseline Year 2000 Conditions
The characterization of the Baseline Year 2000 conditions within the Kinnickinnic River
watershed was a crucial step in this WRPs planning process. A large amount of data was
compiled for each of the 10 assessment point areas included in the watershed (see Chapter 4). A
few important planning considerations emerged from the analysis of the baseline data:
The watershed contains highly developed urban areas, which will be a critical
consideration during implementation.
Analysis of the baseline loading data revealed the importance of identifying unknown
sources of fecal coliform bacteria within the watershed.
The baseline characterization also highlighted the predominant role of nonpoint sources
with respect to nutrient loading. However, the analysis also revealed the need to consider
1-6
Kinnickinnic River
non-contact cooling water and the role of phosphorus compounds in drinking water when
identifying priority actions to curb nutrient loading.
Habitat conditions vary among assessment point areas throughout the watershed. This
WRPs identification of critical habitat impairments helps prioritize actions to improve
habitat within the watershed.
1.3.3 Management Strategies to Achieve Goals
This WRP sought to identify management strategies that could be developed to reduce the loads
in a cost effective manner to achieve the goals identified for the three focus areas. The approach
to reduce pollutant loads in the Kinnickinnic River watershed is predicated on the assumption
that the existing regulations for point and nonpoint sources of pollution will be implemented (see
Table 5-1 in Chapter 5 for an accounting of existing regulations; examples include Point Source
Control, Combined Sewer Overflow/Separate Sewer Overflow (CSO/SSO) Reduction Program,
and Wis. Admin. Code Natural Resources (NR) 151 Runoff Management (non-Ag only). In other
words, the analysis assumes the recommended management strategies used to meet these
regulations, identified in the 2020 Facilities Plan and SEWRPCs RWQMPU, are in place.
These regulatory management strategies would then be the foundation on which new
management strategies are added to achieve the desired goals.
This WRP partitions these management strategies, comprised of facilities, policies, operational
improvements, and programs into three categories:
Existing regulatory management strategies (See Chapter 5, Table 5-1)
Other management strategies in various stages of implementation (See Chapter 5, Table
5-2)
Management strategies recommended for implementation by the RWQMPU, but not yet
implemented (See Chapter 5, Table 5-3)
The existing regulatory management strategies identified in Table 5-1 as well as the management
strategies in various stages of implementation generally address water quality. A number of
strategies to improve habitat and further improve water quality are either in the process of being
implemented (Table 5-2) or are yet to be implemented (Table 5-3).
1.3.4 Expected Benefits
Chapter 6 addresses the expected load reductions and improvements to habitat as well as
estimates future impacts to water quality. Analysis of loading data estimates are summarized in
the following bullets. These bullets present cumulative load reductions from the major
components of the RWQMPU:
Loads of total suspended solids (TSS) and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) increase
from Baseline Year 2000 to Planned 2020 Future with Planned Growth conditions
whereas total phosphorus (TP) loads stay about the same and fecal coliform loads
slightly decrease.
Implementation of Wis. Admin. Code Natural Resources (NR) 151 Runoff Management,
(non-Agriculture [Ag] only), as called for under the RWQMPU, results in an 11%
decrease in TP loads, a 24% decrease in TSS loads, a 12% decrease in BOD loads, and a
1-7
Kinnickinnic River
13% decrease in fecal coliform loads, relative to planned 2020 future with planned
growth conditions.
Implementation of the Point Source Plan, recommended in the RWQMPU, results in
additional load reductions of 7% for TP, 1% for TSS, 3% for BOD, and 21% for fecal
coliform, relative to planned 2020 future with NR 151(non-Ag only) conditions.
Implementation of the remaining measures in the recommended RWQMPU results in
additional load reductions of 4% for TP and 29% for fecal coliform, relative to the
planned 2020 future with point source plan (5-Year LOP). No additional load reductions
are predicted for TSS or BOD.
The expected load reductions for the Kinnickinnic River watershed were estimated from the
modeling that was completed in support of the 2020 FP, the RWQMPU, and this WRP. In some
ways, these load reductions represent an upper estimate of the load reductions that could be
achieved in the watershed because they are based on full implementation of a variety of
management measures from the RWQMPU that were then incorporated into this WRP as
actions. However, several management measures included in this WRP were not included in the
model runs (e.g. the statewide ban on phosphorus in fertilizers). It is therefore possible that load
reductions greater than those modeled for the RWQMPU could eventually be realized.
Despite significant projected load reductions, water quality modeling presented in Chapter 6
indicates that modeled year 2020 water quality assessments or scores generally show minor
improvements or no change, although in some instances, water quality exhibits minor
deterioration. Reduced loading does not necessarily directly translate to an improved water
quality score because, in some cases, the baseline water quality is considerably degraded. This
occurs because the scores are based on the percentage of time that compliance with standards is
met. Reduced loading will improve water quality, but if compliance with water quality standard
is still only met 70% of the time, the water quality will still be scored as poor.
1.3.5 Prioritization of Actions
The three focus areas determined by the SWWTs Science Committee included bacteria/public
health, habitat and aesthetics, and nutrients/phosphorus. The technical team analyzed the
potential benefits and developed a list of high priority actions specifically targeted toward the
three focus areas. The recommended high priority actions are summarized in the following
section, which includes excerpts from Table 7-5 Foundation Actions.
a. Public Health
The SWWT committees identified protection of human health as the most important water
quality goal of this WRP. Reducing bacterial loads is a critical element because many locations
in the Kinnickinnic River watershed frequently do not meet existing bacterial water quality
criteria, which means there is a greater risk of getting sick when contacting the water. In
addition to swift and comprehensive action to address significant sources of bacterial loading,
this WRP endorses the enhancement of safe recreation within the Kinnickinnic River. Table 1-1
presents the Kinnickinnic River WRPs foundation actions to improve and address public health
with respect to water quality in the Kinnickinnic River watershed. Foundation actions are a
subset of the priority actions identified in Chapter 7. These actions are considered to be
predecessor actions to be completed first in order to realize the full benefit of the other actions
identified in this WRP.
1-8
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 1-1
PUBLIC HEALTH TARGETS AND FOUNDATION ACTIONS

Watershed Targets to be
Accomplished by 2015
Foundation Actions
1a. Conduct dry weather surveys to identify outfalls
that have dry weather flows
1b. Sample outfalls to determine which have human
bacteria discharges (wet and dry weather samples)
1. Identify unknown sources of

bacteria, and correct/remove/
disconnect them
1c. Determine ownership/owner of outfalls that have

dry weather flows and/or human bacteria
1d. Initiate discussion with owner of outfall to begin
determining corrective actions
1e. Implement projects to correct/remove/disconnect
unknown sources of bacteria
2a. Identify recreational and body contact areas
2. Increase recreational use of

watershed and public access
3. Reduce bacteria sources from landbased activities
2b. Identify other areas suitable for recreation or body

contact
2c. Prioritize areas to restore for recreational use
identified in Action 2b based on success of Action
1e.
3a. Identify where public ownership of land can serve
as a starting point to increase riparian buffers
3b. Manage pet litter
3c. Implement programs to discourage unacceptably
high numbers of waterfowl from congregating near
water features - identify areas and take action to
discourage waterfowl feeding
3d. Implement projects and programs to comply with
MS4 permits and NR 151 TSS and runoff reduction
requirements (reduced TSS expected to result in
coincidental bacteria reduction)
3d. Implement projects and programs to comply with
coincidental bacteria reduction)
The specific targets include the following:

Identify unknown sources of bacteria, including illicit connections
Item 1 on Table 1-1 indicates that this WRP prioritizes activities that will address illicit
connections. This is important for two reasons: (1) significant water quality improvements are
unlikely to occur until illicit connections are addressed, and (2) bacteria from illicit connections
are recognized as a greater threat to human health than bacteria from other sources.
Note: this WRP recognizes that future indicators of waterborne bacteria and the related
human health risk will likely be based upon more effective measures of human risk and not
based on fecal coliform. However, focusing on illicit connections is required regardless of
1-9
Kinnickinnic River
what indicator is used in the future. The key point is that actions to address unknown sources
of bacteria need to prioritize those that are associated with human sources of bacteria. See
Section 7.2.1 in Chapter 7 for a discussion of alternative pathogen indicators.
This WRP focuses efforts on specific stream reaches, or segments, to investigate illicit
connections based upon fecal coliform loadings from unknown sources determined during
water quality model development. The analysis of the modeling data suggests that efforts focus
on specific areas as noted in Chapter 7, Table 7-1.
Increase recreational use
In an effort to increase recreational use of the Kinnickinnic River watershed, this WRP seeks to
identify recreational areas where body contact occurs as well as areas that have the potential for
future recreational activity. There are gaps in the existing data sets and this WRP recommends
collecting additional data. Once identified and with unknown sources of bacteria addressed, the
areas with recreation potential would be prioritized and restored.
Reduce bacterial sources from land-based sources
This WRP recommends actions identified to address urban sources of fecal coliform bacteria,
including pet waste and waterfowl, identifying opportunities to expand riparian buffers as well as
projects to facilitate compliance with NR 151. See Chapter 7, Table 7-1.
b. Habitat and Aesthetics
Protecting and improving aquatic community health is also a critical goal of this WRP and
encompasses a wide range of water resources issues such as improving habitat conditions,
restoring natural flow and temperature regimes, removing trash, and addressing pollutants such
as chlorides, sediment, and BOD. Note that removing trash and general consideration of
aesthetics were a major concern for the Kinnickinnic WAT. This reflects the fact that most
people use visual criteria to assess impairment. These criteria can be translated into technical
standards which collectively are defined as habitat. Consequently the use of the phrase habitat
and aesthetics addresses both citizen and water resources professional elements. Based upon a
review of available data and consultations with local biological experts, Table 1-2 identifies
specific foundation actions (land-based and in-stream-based) to improve and address habitat and
aesthetics that are recommended by this WRP:
1-10
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 1-2
HABITAT AND AESTHETICS TARGETS AND FOUNDATION ACTIONS
Watershed Targets
Foundation Actions
Land-based
1a. Implement stormwater management practices at

the subwatershed level
1. Moderate flow regimes to decrease

flashiness
1b. Implement stormwater management practices at

the neighborhood level
1c. Maintain stormwater management practices at all
levels
2. Reduce water quality and quantity

impacts using green infrastructure
1d. Restore floodplain connectivity with the stream

system
2a. Implement green infrastructure to re-establish
more natural hydrology, reduce runoff and
improve water quality (continue and expand
current efforts; e.g. Green Milwaukee and MMSD's
green infrastructure plan)
3a. Evaluate existing road salt reduction programs
3. Reduce water quality impacts from

nonpoint runoff (focus on chlorides)
3b. Implement new pilot road salt reduction programs

3c. Implement road salt reduction program education
Instream-based
1. Restore fish and aquatic organism
passage from Lake Michigan to the
headwaters and tributaries (i.e. Follow 3Tiered Prioritization Strategy as outlined
in Appendix 4A)
1a. Remove concrete within the lower reaches of the

mainstem
1b. Develop plans for removal of additional
obstructions on the mainstem or tributaries and
implement the plans
1c. Develop detailed assessments to expand
passage restoration efforts beyond the mainstem
to the tributaries, prioritize them, and implement
them
Moderate flow regimes to decrease flashiness

Flashiness is a measure of how rapidly flows increase and decrease due to wet weather and snow
melt. Flashiness within the Kinnickinnic river watershed tends to be high due to a high degree of
impervious surfaces as compared to the total land surface within the Kinnickinnic River
watershed that inhibits infiltration of surface runoff into the ground. Stream flashiness is an
impairment to habitat within the watershed. This WRP recommends actions to manage
stormwater at various levels and restore connectivity to adjacent floodplains to moderate
flashiness and improve habitat.
1-11
Kinnickinnic River
Reduce impacts through green infrastructure

The other land-based target to address habitat and aesthetics within the Kinnickinnic River
watershed is focused on green infrastructure to address runoff quality and reduce runoff quantity.
These actions are prioritized in Chapter 7, Table 7-2.
Reduce nonpoint water quality impacts (focus on chlorides)
This WRPs analysis of habitat impairments revealed the important role of chlorides in the
Kinnickinnic River watershed. Consequently, this WRP focuses on chloride loading with respect
to nonpoint source pollution impacts to habitat. This WRP recommends actions to evaluate
existing road salt programs as well as actions to implement pilot programs and educational
programs to reduce road salt application. Actions to address chloride loading are prioritized in
Chapter 7, Table 7-2.
Restore fish passage throughout the watershed
Provision of fish and aquatic life passage includes the restoration and recreation of in-stream and
riparian habitat. This habitat provides not only refuge for fish and aquatic life, but also
comprises the feeding and breeding areas necessary for the survival of these organisms. This instream-based target depends upon the removal of concrete within the lower reaches of the
mainstem. While restoration efforts are critical in the lower reaches, this WRP also recommends
that fish passage restoration efforts are expanded to upstream tributaries. This WRP is also
responsive to the need to restore connectivity with adjacent floodplains and the restoration of
more natural hydrology by re-creating more meandering stream courses.
c. Nutrients
Phosphorus loading to Lake Michigan (and to a lesser extent within the Kinnickinnic River
watershed) has also been identified as a priority issue to be addressed by this WRP, and the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) is in the process of developing water
quality standards for phosphorus. The most significant sources of phosphorus are believed to be
from non-contact cooling water discharges and urban stormwater runoff. Table 1-3 presents the
specific nutrient-related Foundation actions that are recommended by this WRP:
TABLE 1-3
NUTRIENTS TARGETS AND FOUNDATION ACTIONS
Watershed Targets
Foundation Actions
1a. Continue adaptive implementation of overflow
control program
1. Reduce phosphorus loads from

regulated discharges
1b. Implement projects and programs to comply with

coincidental TP reduction)
1d. Reduce phosphorus loads with State ban of
phosphorus in commercial fertilizers
2. Reduce use of phosphorus compounds

for control of lead and copper in
drinking water systems
2a. Research development of alternatives to

phosphorus compounds by public and private
researchers in area universities and industries
1-12
Kinnickinnic River
Reduce phosphorus loads from regulated discharges

This WRP identified four priority actions to target phosphorus loading from regulated
discharges, including combined sewer overflows and separate sewer overflows as well as
discharges that are regulated through NR 151 and the MS4 permitting process. This WRP also
emphasizes the benefits of Wisconsins ban on phosphorus in commercial fertilizers and
recommends that additional studies be conducted and the progress on the phosphorus reductions
that result from the ban be reported.
Reduce use of phosphorus compounds in drinking water
Currently, phosphorus compounds are added to drinking water to control concentrations of
copper and lead. In many residential drinking water systems, copper and lead leach from piping
and can pose health concerns to the public, especially the very young. This WRP recommends
research and development of alternatives to the use of phosphorus compounds in drinking water.
1.3.6 Other Pollutants
Technical Report No. 39 of the RWQMPU indicates that (polychlorinated biphenyls) PCBs have
been detected within the mainstem of the Kinnickinnic River and that PCB concentrations
generally increase from upstream to downstream. This WRP recognizes that PCBs and other
pollutants, such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) nitrogen, copper, and pharmaceutical and
personal care products (PPCPs), also affect water quality within the Kinnickinnic River
watershed. Although this WRP does not identify or prioritize specific actions to address these
other pollutants, several of the recommended actions identified to address the three focus areas
would result in coincident loading reductions of the other pollutants. For example, the expansion
of riparian buffers to improve habitat and increase phosphorus removal from stormwater would
also simultaneously lead to some reductions in nitrogen loadings. More specific actions to
address PCBs, PAHs, nitrogen, copper, and PPCPs will be identified when future updates of this
WRP are developed.
1.3.7 Implementation and Monitoring
Chapter 8: Implementation Strategy is the final chapter of this WRP. This chapter addresses the
implementation of the various actions identified in Chapter 7. This WRP stresses the importance
of addressing funding issues and sources (see Appendix 8A) as well as post implementation
monitoring. Follow-up monitoring recommendations are also included in this WRP because
additional data will be needed to fulfill three primary objectives: (1) obtain additional data to
address information gaps and uncertainty in the current analysis, (2) ensure that the identified
management actions are undertaken, and (3) ensure that actions are having the desired effect.
Implementation activities will then be adjusted based on this new information through the use of
an adaptive management framework to be coordinated by the SWWT.
1.3.8 Policy Issues
Policy issues need to be addressed as projects are considered for implementation. The following
issues compose the initial list to be considered:
Total maximum daily load (TMDL) development: Evaluation should include the timing
of any TMDLs, leadership of the TMDLs in terms of regulatory agencies
(WDNR/USEPA) versus third party (led by public agencies such as the MMSD) and
the exact format of the TMDLs (i.e., which pollutants and which portions of the
1-13
Kinnickinnic River
watershed). An additional potential issue is the regulatory relationship between NR 151

and TMDLs, as noted in Chapter 2 of this WRP.
Consideration of watershed permits: The issues to be addressed regarding this topic are
summarized in the document White Paper/Analysis for Watershed-based Permitting
Primer found in Appendix 8B.
Water quality trading: The issues to be addressed regarding this topic are summarized in
Appendix 8C.
NR 151 implementation: The regulatory and financial issues regarding implementation
of NR 151 may influence the effectiveness of this regulation on water quality and the
implementation of this WRP.
Alternatives to adding phosphorus compounds to drinking water: There are policy issues
that should be addressed as this major source of phosphorous to the watershed is not
currently the focus of any scientific or regulatory program.
Alternative indicator to replace fecal coliform bacteria: The policy implications of
building a local consensus for and support of new methods to assess water borne disease
risk need to be addressed.
1-14
Kinnickinnic River
Chapter 2: Introduction
2.1
Purpose of the Watershed Restoration Plan
The primary purpose of this Kinnickinnic River Watershed Restoration Plan (WRP) is to develop
an adaptive plan with stakeholders that works towards cost-effective water quality and habitat
improvement in the watershed. Recognizing the need to work towards meeting water quality
standards and that stakeholders would like to see improvements (particularly to habitat) that may
go beyond meeting water quality standards, the WRP provides specific actions that can be
implemented in the short term (three to five years) and lays out a more general plan for the long
term to meet these objectives.
The WRP used the Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. (SWWT) as the stakeholder
group for development of the plan and will also use the SWWT as the vehicle for the plans
implementation.
2.2
Pathway to the Watershed Restoration Plan
2.2.1 The Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update and the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage Districts 2020 Facilities Planning Process (2002-2007)
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys (USEPA) watershed approach to facilities planning
has been completed in southeastern Wisconsin by the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District
(MMSD) in partnership with the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
(SEWRPC), the regions 208 planning agency. This combined, innovative planning project
called the Water Quality Initiative (WQI) consisted of the MMSDs 2020 Facilities Plan
(2020 FP) and SEWRPCs Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update (RWQMPU). The
2020 FP component of the WQI was completed and approved by the Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources (WDNR) in 2007 and concluded the following:
1) Nonpoint pollution (i.e., stormwater runoff) is the largest source of fecal coliform
bacteria, a primary pollutant of concern; however, it should be noted that a significant
fraction of the nonpoint bacteria load could be coming from failing (exfiltrating) sanitary
sewers or potentially illicit sanitary connections. The annual bacteria load percentages by
source category to the six greater Milwaukee watersheds (GMW) are shown in Figure 21.
2) Eliminating the combined sewer overflows (CSOs) that occur two to three times per year
and the very infrequent sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) that still may occur during
extreme wet weather conditions accompanied by widespread flooding will result in little
or no water quality improvement on an annual basis.
3) Significant improvements to water quality can only be achieved through regional
implementation of extensive measures to reduce pollution from nonpoint sources.
4) The MMSDs primary focus of the 2020 FP must be to develop a recommended plan that
meets the regulatory requirements regarding MMSDs point sources.
5) Recommendations for nonpoint control measures are presented in the RWQMPU because
MMSD lacks authority to implement regional nonpoint control measures.
2-1
Kinnickinnic River
6) There is no real framework for implementation of the recommendations of the

RWQMPU regarding the reduction of nonpoint stormwater pollution (nonpoint
stormwater in the planning efforts included surface runoff and discharges from storm
sewers and drainage ditches).
Rural
Nonpoint
Stormw ater
< 0.1%
Industrial
< 0.1%
SSOs
20%
CSOs
11%
Urban
Nonpoint
Stormw ater
69%
FIGURE 2-1: ANNUAL BACTERIA LOAD PERCENTAGES BY SOURCE CATEGORY TO THE

KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED YEAR 2000 CONDITIONS
2.2.2 Forging a New Path

As the WQI was being completed, many stakeholders in the Milwaukee area began to realize
that a means of implementing the broader recommendations of the RWQMPU was needed.
This is conceptually illustrated in Figure 2-2, which was an attempt to address the question what next? This question was often accompanied by the question - why cant we forge a new
path?
2-2
Kinnickinnic River
Note that this figure shows an organization called the Milwaukee Regional Partnership Initiative. This
has been renamed the Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc.
FIGURE 2-2: WHAT PATHWAYS EXIST FOR PROGRESS?
The USEPA encourages and supports watershed area planning intended to achieve needed water
quality improvements in the most cost effective manner. The RWQMPU recommends a holistic
set of pollution abatement actions that will ultimately lead to significantly improved water
quality in the GMW. These actions will address regulatory goals in terms of water quality
improvement and must be implemented by a variety of governmental agencies and individual
property owners. The question for the Milwaukee area was how to start this process?
2.3
Plan Implementation Considerations
2.3.1
Consideration of Total Maximum Daily Load Analyses
A workshop on Integrated Watershed Implementation Planning was held in March 2007 and
was attended by the USEPA, WDNR, SEWRPC, MMSD and technical consultant staff, and
other local and national leaders in watershed planning. The purpose was to form the foundation
for the watershed implementation plan and, more specifically, consider the next steps for water
quality improvement in the Milwaukee area. The agenda for this meeting is shown in Appendix
2A.
2-3
Kinnickinnic River
Input received at the workshop was intended to result in the formation of a technically- and
socially-feasible integrated watershed implementation plan that has the support of key
stakeholders, employing innovative implementation approaches (e.g., water quality trading,
watershed-based permitting, phased total maximum daily loads (TMDL)s, wet weather water
quality standards) intended to effectively and efficiently attain water quality standards in the
GMW. As a result of this workshop and many subsequent meetings in 2007, the MMSD,
working in concert with the USEPA and the WDNR, considered the initiation of a third party
TMDL effort.
The drivers for the third party TMDL were that the WDNR was not planning to initiate any
TMDL work in the GMW for many years and the implementation of Wis. Admin. Code Natural
Resources (NR) 151 Runoff Management, a state of Wisconsin nonpoint pollution regulation
with compliance deadlines in 2008 and 2013. An additional concern was that the water quality
improvement efforts begun under the WQI should continue given the work already accomplished
and the momentum established in the community. This momentum was exemplified by the
formation of a new collaborative organization, the Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust,
Inc., in the spring of 2008.
2.3.2
Third Party Total Maximum Daily Loads and NR 151
In October 2007, the MMSD Commission approved a contract with the 2020 FP technical team
to conduct third party TMDLs for the major watersheds in Milwaukee the Milwaukee River,
Menomonee River, Kinnickinnic River and Estuary/Lake Michigan watersheds.
Once this effort was approved, preliminary negotiations began with the WDNR staff to enlist
their input into the process and to begin technical discussions on the existing 303(d) listed
pollutants and other matters (see the WDNRs website for more information on impaired waters
and the 303(d) list).1 In other words, the MMSD, its technical team and the WDNR began in
depth technical discussions regarding the scope of the third party TMDL.
Typically, a TMDL is the framework for assessing load allocations in a watershed and is one of
the first steps in identifying the actions needed in a watershed to meet applicable water quality
standards. In the case of the GMW, the states regulatory program, which is based on
performance standards contained in Wis. Admin. Code NR 151 Runoff Management, has already
been implemented. The performance standards contained in NR 151 require permitted
municipalities with separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) to reduce total suspended solid (TSS)
loads by 20% by 2008 and 40% by 2013 from areas of existing development. New development
must implement stormwater management practices to reduce the TSS load from the site by 80%.
Technical standards have been developed by the state to implement the prescribed performance
standards. Other provisions of the regulations prescribe performance standards and prohibitions
for agricultural facilities and agricultural practices that are nonpoint sources and require
implementation of agricultural best management practices (BMPs) when and if the Wisconsin
legislature provides funding for these facilities.
The MMSD and its technical team discussed with the WDNR the relationship between the third
party TMDL effort and the NR 151 regulatory requirements, which are essentially technologybased requirements. Discussions between the MMSD and the WDNR regarding application of
1
WDNR, 2008 Methodology for Placing Waters on the Impaired Waters List (last revised February 17, 2008),
http://www.dnr.wi.gov/org/water/wm/wqs/303d/2008/2008methodology.htm
2-4
Kinnickinnic River
NR 151 requirements independent of TMDL findings changed the course and form of the GMW
TMDL program.
2.3.3
Total Maximum Daily Loads and the Clean Water Act
The discussion between the MMSDs technical team and the WDNR related to some
fundamental assumptions of the 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA). Specifically, the MMSDs
technical team and the WDNR analyzed the relative merits of building nonpoint/stormwater
water quality improvement actions from the top down using a uniform technology program,
or from the bottom up starting with existing water quality data and building programs
specifically to meet water quality objectives. The similarity between the NR 151 regulatory
requirement and the CWA is that the application of a uniform technology program is
fundamentally assumed to be the minimum effort needed to meet water quality standards.
Additional water quality improvement effort was assumed to be required when this minimum
initial activity based upon uniform technology application did not result in meeting water quality
standards. The original CWA envisioned that nonpoint/stormwater improvement would be based
solely on water quality, not on uniform, minimum technology requirements. As outlined in a
recent publication from the University of Texas:2
TMDL stands for Total Maximum Daily Load and is the maximum amount of a pollutant
that a water body can receive from all of its sources and still meet water quality
standards set by the state for designated uses. Though TMDLs have only recently been
thrust into the spotlight, they are not a new idea. The TMDL program is simply the
enforcement of rules provided in the Clean Water Act of 1972 (CWA). Sections 303 (a),
303 (b), and 303 (c) of the CWA mandate that states develop water quality standards for
water bodies within their boundaries based on the designated uses of these water bodies.
These sections also provide guidelines for development and review of these standards.
The provisions in the CWA that called for non-point source pollution control and TMDLs
were largely ignored for 20 years following the passage of the CWA partly due to our
lack of knowledge concerning non-point source pollution and its control. Instead, efforts
to control water pollution were focused on implementing best available technology to
clean up point-source pollution.
Many challenges exist in the implementation of the TMDL program. Non-point source
pollution, which is basically stormwater runoff that has been polluted by land use, is still
not well understood. It is difficult to quantify loadings produced by non-point source
pollution and to predict the water quality responses of water bodies due to these
loadings. Also, the connection of non-point source pollution to land use means that it
must be controlled through land use practices, or the implementation of Best
Management Practices (BMPs). For the same reasons we do not understand non-point
source pollution, we do not fully understand the effectiveness of BMPs. Furthermore,
many landowners are affected by the TMDL program and must be involved in the
planning process. Considering that 21,000 water bodies were reported that did not meet
water quality standards, and that the resources of most state environmental agencies are
limited, the challenges facing the TMDL program are obviously substantial.
2
Lee C. Sherman, Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) Effects on Land Use Planning, CE 385D Water
Resources Planning and Management University of Texas at Austin (May 5, 2001)
2-5
Kinnickinnic River
2.3.4 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Nonpoint Pollution Program Wis.

Admin. Code Natural Resources ( NR) 151 Runoff Management
The WDNR, believing that the top down technology-based regulatory program of NR 151
would result in the most cost effective and equitable area-wide water quality improvement,
believes that a third party TMDL effort would only add to the requirements of NR 151. The NR
151 regulation has the following purpose:
This chapter establishes runoff pollution performance standards for nonagricultural
facilities and transportation facilities and performance standards and prohibitions for
agricultural facilities and practices designed to achieve water quality standards as
required by s. 281.16 (2) and (3), Stats. This chapter also specifies a process for the
development and dissemination of department technical standards to implement the
nonagricultural performance standards as required by s. 281.16 (2) (b), Stats. If these
performance standards and prohibitions do not achieve water quality standards, this
chapter specifies how the department may develop targeted performance standards in
conformance with s. NR 151.004.
As noted in the above excerpt of the NR 151 regulation, the regulation makes the assumption
that if these standards and prohibitions do not meet water quality standards, the chapter
specifies how the department may develop targeted performance standards in conformance with
s. NR 151.004. The language of NR 151.004 is as follows:
For some areas, implementation of the statewide performance standards and prohibitions
in this chapter may not be sufficient to achieve water quality standards. In those cases,
the department shall determine if a specific waterbody will not attain water quality
standards after substantial implementation of the performance standards and
prohibitions in this chapter, using actual or predicted modeling or monitoring. If the
department finds that water quality standards will not be attained using statewide
performance standards and prohibitions but the implementation of targeted performance
standards would attain water quality standards, the department shall promulgate the
targeted performance standards by rule.
Note: Pursuant to s. 281.16 (2) (a) and (3) (a), Stats., the performance standards shall be
designed to meet state water quality standards.
The position of the WDNR is that imposition of the NR 151 performance standards will be
required in all cases in the state and, should the performance standards not result in the
attainment of water quality standards, the WDNR would then promulgate targeted performance
standards as noted in NR 151.004. The NR 151 standards never contemplated that water
quality standards could be attained without the imposition of the uniform technology standards
of NR 151, only that NR 151 was an essential starting point or minimum level of technology that
would need to be applied to achieve water quality standards.
2.4
Pathway Decision
Based on the results of the WQI planning project, the MMSDs technical team thought that there
was a possibility that the outcome of the third party TMDL may result in a different technology
plan and a different water quality improvement than the NR 151 performance standards. The
technical team understood the WDNRs assertion that the TMDL could result in additional
requirements over and above NR 151. The technical team suggested using scientific analysis to
2-6
Kinnickinnic River
contribute to a bottom up approach. The technical team based its idea on the analysis of
existing water quality data in the watersheds studied during the WQI planning project. Also, the
detailed water quality models developed during the WQI planning project were used to assess the
impact of NR 151 on water quality. Two model runs were developed using identical
assumptions except one model run assumed full implementation (urban measures only) of NR
151, and the second run assumed no implementation of NR 151.
A further concern existed regarding the lack of a water quality standard for TSS in Wisconsin.
The closest proxy that can be found is the United States Geological Service (USGS) reference
concentration for TSS. This estimate was used by the WDNR as the basis for TSS TMDLs in
other parts of the state. The reference concentration for TSS, based upon the USGS analysis of
watersheds in the southeastern part of Wisconsin, was expressed as a median concentration of
17.2 mg/l.3 The existing year 2000 model run, as summarized in SEWRPCs RWQMPU,
showed the following with regard to the existing condition model output:4
The RWQMPU water quality simulation model looked at 10 assessment points in the
Kinnickinnic River watershed. None of the assessment points had median TSS
concentrations that exceeded the USGS reference concentration TSS level of 17.2 mg/l.
The average of all the medians was 4.9 mg/l TSS and the median values ranged from 3.8
to 6.5 mg/l TSS. The means averaged 11.7 mg/l TSS with a range from 7.7 to 20.1 mg/l
TSS.
One significant result of these water quality model runs was that the TSS concentrations
in the Kinnickinnic River watershed under existing conditions were below the USGS
reference concentration of 17.2 mg/l TSS as a median value. Appendix N of the
RWQMPU also shows other water quality parameters studied, as well as the RWQMPU
revised year 2020 baseline, the revised baseline with the MMSD action of a five-year
level of protection (LOP) for SSOs, and the two RWQMPU conditions one, the
conditions of the recommended plan and two, the extreme measures condition. This
analysis shows that even with the extreme measures condition (implementation of
many water quality improvement actions above and beyond NR 151 requirements), the
concentration of TSS is not materially changed.
The data on the existing water quality runs as well as the revised 2020 baseline with and
without NR 151 are shown in Appendix 2B. The model runs shown are only for the
MMSD assessment points, which are a subset of the RWQMPU assessment points and
consist of two assessment points in the Kinnickinnic River. Table 2-1 shows the results
of the model run on TSS with NR 151 and without NR 151.
Note: To maintain consistency with the RWQMPU, referenced above, the preceding sections use
existing to describe year 2000 data. Elsewhere in this WRP, the term baseline is used to
indicate year 2000 pollutant loading and water quality data.
USGS, Present and Reference Concentrations and Yields of Suspended Sediment in Streams in the Great Lakes
Region and Adjacent Areas, Scientific Investigations Report 20065066 (2006)
4
SEWRPC, A Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update for the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, Planning
Report No. 50, Appendix N, Water Quality Summary Statistics for the Recommended Plan Tables (December 5,
2007)
2-7
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 2-1
IMPACT OF NR 151 ON MODELED TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Watershed
Kinnickinnic
River
Kinnickinnic
River
Assessment
Location
RI-12
RI-13
Measure
Units / Criteria
Revised
2020
Baseline
(No NR
151)
Revised
2020
Baseline
(W/ NR
151)
Difference
NR 151
Impact
-0.9
-1.6
-18.9%
-12.0%
Median
Mean
mg / L
mg / L
4.7
13.0
3.8
11.4
TSS Guideline
Days met (100 mg/L)
343
344
0.2%
Median
Mean
mg / L
mg / L
4.7
11.8
3.8
10.4
-0.9
-1.5
-19.2%
-12.4%
TSS Guideline
Days met (100 mg/L)
347
348
0.2%
Notes:
The no NR 151 data column is the revised 2020 baseline without simulated NR 151 impact, while the next column revised 2020
baseline is the same condition with NR 151 simulated impact.
The TSS guideline was developed in the WQI as a measure to assess how many days the watersheds met the guideline to allow
for comparison of alternatives since no TSS water quality standard exists.
The data show that NR 151 does improve TSS concentrations in a range from about 12% to 20%
in the Kinnickinnic River watershed, but the median TSS concentrations are already well below
the reference concentration of 17.2 mg/l.
The impact of NR 151 on fecal coliform levels, as shown in Appendix 2B data, is insignificant as
the improvement in the percent of time the standard is met in the typical year is no greater than
1% at any of the assessment points in the Kinnickinnic River watershed. The most frequently
exceeded water quality parameter analyzed for the WQI in the GMW was compliance with the
existing fecal coliform water quality standards. Thus, based upon the data produced in the
RWQMPU, the imposition of NR 151 will have essentially no impact on fecal coliform
compliance. Information regarding fecal coliform pollution and actions that can help address it
are provided in Chapters 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
Given this complex situation, including the fact that the WDNR was in the process of evaluating
the NR 151 regulation and that the timetable for implementation of the regulation may be
lengthened, the MMSD and the technical team decided to pursue a different path for the
development of the detailed implementation plan for the WQI. This path, illustrated in Figure 23, was to develop a WRP instead of a third party TMDL.
This effort was based upon the nine elements of the CWA section 319 guidelines for developing
effective watershed plans for threatened and impaired waters.5 The effort mirrors the TMDL
concept, but did not result in an actual TMDL or have the regulatory impact of a TMDL. This
effort began in July 2008.
The MMSD chose this route for the following reasons:
USEPA, Handbook for Developing Watershed Plans to Restore and Protect our Waters, http://www.epa.gov/
owow/nps/watershed_handbook/, EPA 841-B-08-002 (March 2008)
2-8
Kinnickinnic River
The steps are basically the same whether doing a TMDL or a plan that follows the CWA
section 319 guidelines (section 319 plan).
Many grant programs exist to facilitate the development of a section 319 plan.
A section 319 plan produces estimates of load reductions and end points similar to what a
TMDL would produce.
The work product of a section 319 plan can eventually be revised and used as the basis
for a TMDL.
These plans do not have the regulatory impact of a TMDL; thus, they offer different
pathways to get to watershed permits, trading, etc.
Finally, the WDNR has already developed an innovative approach to watershed planning
that does not require a TMDL called an Environmental Accountability Project (EAP).
Although an EAP is not a viable option for the Kinnickinnic River watershed because of
the complex water quality issues being addressed, it is an example of watershed planning
that does not require a TMDL. Similar to the idea behind the development of the WRP,
the WDNR and USEPA Region 5 have developed this approach, which avoids the need
for a TMDL and the listing of stream segments on the state 303(d) list and affords the
ability
to use the EAP
as the
routeWATERSHED
to a watershed permit
and eventually watershed-based
FRAMEWORK
FOR
THE
RESTORATION
PLANS
trading.
SWWT
FIGURE 2-3: FRAMEWORK FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED RESTORATION PLAN
2-9
Kinnickinnic River
The development of a WRP that is based on a USEPA 319 plan has the benefit of allowing the
plan to focus on bottom up planning while incorporating the water quality improvement
benefits of a top down plan. In other words, the development of this type of WRP used water
quality data and science to specifically target the water quality-based needs of the Kinnickinnic
River watershed, but also incorporates the impacts of the top down implementation of uniform
technology programs such as the NR 151 regulation. This type of plan not only realizes the
water quality benefits of both types of planning approaches, it also addresses the concerns of a
wide range of stakeholders, including communities, citizen groups, WDNR, USEPA, SEWRPC,
and MMSD.
2.5
Development of the Watershed Restoration Plan
2.5.1
Overview
This WRP represents the next step in the implementation of a science-based watershed
improvement effort. This second-level planning effort builds upon the sound science, extensive
data, and alternatives analysis of the WQI. The result of this work effort is this adaptive, phased
WRP for the Kinnickinnic River watershed. This WRP contains the following:
The characterization of the baseline conditions within the Kinnickinnic River watershed
highlighting a few important planning considerations, including the following:
o
The watershed contains highly developed urban areas a critical consideration

during implementation.
The importance of identifying unknown sources of fecal coliform bacteria within

the watershed.
The predominant role of nonpoint sources with respect to nutrient loading.

However, the analysis also revealed the need to consider non-contact cooling
water and the role of phosphate compounds in drinking water when identifying
priority actions to curb nutrient loading.
Habitat conditions vary among assessment point areas throughout the watershed.
The critical habitat impairments identified herein help prioritize actions to
improve habitat within the watershed.
The results of a collaborative stakeholder involvement effort that was based upon
interaction with a newly formed partnership called the SWWT. This is a voluntary, nontaxing partnership of independent units of government, special purpose districts,
agencies, organizations, and members at large that share common goals. These entities
agreed to work collaboratively to achieve healthy and sustainable water resources
throughout the GMW. Through the stakeholder input of the SWWT, three major focus
areas emerged for the WRP: bacteria/public health, habitat and aesthetics, and
nutrients/phosphorus. These focus areas reflect the linkage between water quality
parameters and the way people use and enjoy the streams in the Kinnickinnic River
watershed.
An implementation strategy that focuses on priority actions that should take place in the
near term to meet long-term water quality goals and provides direction for future actions.
2-10
Kinnickinnic River
An initial list of policy issues that may influence the implementation schedule and
process. The policy issues should be prioritized and examined by the SWWT Policy
Committee as projects are considered for implementation.
An important issue addressed during the development of this WRP was how to best integrate
other ongoing watershed management efforts (e.g., recommendations in the RWQMPU and the
2020 FP, various nonpoint water quality improvements as a result of USEPAs Phase II
stormwater requirements, and the impact of NR 151) with this effort. The technical team, along
with input from the SWWT, developed an approach to build on the recommendations of the
RWQMPU. Therefore, the recommendations from the RWQMPU, the 2020 FP, Phase II
requirements and impacts of NR 151 were all included in the analysis.
The goals from the RWQMPU were used as a starting point for the WRP. Although achieving
these goals is not expected to meet water quality standards for all pollutants in all areas of the
watershed, especially for fecal coliform, achieving them will provide a significant incremental
step towards water quality and habitat improvement. A substantial amount of work will be
required in the watershed to implement the recommended actions to meet these goals. Once
these goals are met, additional work can be done to go beyond the RWQMPU goals. This is
discussed below and in Chapter 8.
The overall implementation strategy of the WRP is presented in Chapter 8. The implementation
strategy incorporates adaptive management to identify and implement actions, monitor
incremental progress toward achieving water quality and habitat improvements, and modify the
actions as necessary. The recommended phasing strategy for implementation of this WRP is as
follows:
Phase 1- Completed and Committed Actions/Projects: The first phase in implementing this
WRP includes identifying relevant actions or projects that have been recently completed and a
recommendation to implement already committed projects and programs.As such, the technical
analysis underpinning this WRP started with the baseline WQI water quality model and
added in all the committed projects as of January 1, 2008 using the same approach taken for
the WQI (see Appendix 4B for a description of the updates made to the WQI model). This phase
represents recent progress and will continue approximately through the year 2015.
Phase 2 Implement Identified Foundation Actions and Other Identified High Priority
Actions: The second phase of adaptive implementation includes the implementation of the
foundation actions and the other high priority actions identified in the RWQMPU and by the
SWWT committees during the development of the WRP. This phase also represents progress in
the years 2010 to about 2015.
Phase 3 Full Implementation of the RWQMPU: The third phase of adaptive
implementation of this WRP consists of full implementation of the RWQMPU
recommendations. Depending on the monitoring results of the first two phases, these actions
could include more widespread implementation of the same or modified actions or they could
include most of the remaining elements contained in the RWQMPU (medium- and low-priority
actions) and the additional actions identified through the development of the WRP. These
actions are discussed in Chapters 5, 6 and 7 of this WRP. An emphasis would be placed on the
controls that are determined to be most successful (technically, socially, and financially) during
2-11
Kinnickinnic River
Phases 1 and 2. The development of the initiatives noted in Phase 2 will facilitate this effort.
This phase would represent progress in the years 2016 to about 2020.
It is anticipate that Phase 3 would result in meeting the water quality and habitat improvement
goals presented in the RWQMPU and discussed in Chapter 3 of this WRP. Phase 3 is not
presented further in this WRP because the details of this phase will depend upon the results of
Phase 1 and 2.
Phase 4 Enhanced Level of Controls: The final fourth phase of adaptive implementation of
this WRP consists of an enhanced level of controls to further improve water quality or habitat
beyond the goals established by the RWQMPU. Depending on the monitoring results of the first
three phases, these actions could include more widespread implementation of the same or
modified actions. An emphasis would be placed on the controls that are determined to be most
successful (technically, socially, and financially) during Phases 1, 2 and 3. The development of
the initiatives noted in Phase 2 will facilitate this effort. This phase could overlap with Phase 3
and could represent progress in the years 2016 to 2020 or beyond.
Phase 4 is not yet developed nor presented in this chapter because this phase will depend upon
the results of Phases 1, 2 and 3.
Phase 5 Fully Meet Water Quality Standards: The final phase of implementation could be
the adoption of all controls necessary to fully meet achievable water quality standards, whether
those are the existing standards, site-specific standards, or future changes in water quality
standards. This phase could occur after 2020.
2.5.2
Detailed Tasks
The tasks listed below served as the technical basis for developing this WRP to meet water
quality standards and protect water resources in the Kinnickinnic River watershed. The tasks are
organized according to the nine elements of the CWA section 319 guidelines for developing
effective watershed plans for threatened and impaired waters. The nine elements are the
following:
1) Identify causes of impairment and pollutant sources that need to be controlled to achieve
needed load reductions and any other goals identified in the watershed plan. This
information was used to develop a conceptual plan for the Kinnickinnic River WRP.
2) Estimate the load reductions expected from management measures.
3) Describe the management measures that will need to be implemented to achieve load
reductions, including a description of the critical areas in which those measures will be
needed.
4) Estimate the amount of technical and financial assistance needed, the associated costs,
and/or the sources and authorities that will be relied upon to implement the plan.
5) Develop an information and education component to enhance public understanding of the
project and encourage early and continued participation.
6) Develop a schedule for implementing the identified management measures.
7) Describe interim measurable milestones for determining whether the management
measures or other control actions are being implemented.
2-12
Kinnickinnic River
8) Develop a set of criteria that can be used to determine whether loading reductions are
being achieved over time and substantial progress is being made toward attaining water
quality standards.
9) Develop a monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation
efforts over time.
The innovative watershed planning effort conducted during the development of this WRP
included the following:
A series of workshops conducted with the SWWT committees, which included
representatives from the WDNR, to obtain their input on the scope of the WRP effort (to
finalize the pollutants to be assessed and to confirm the water quality targets to be used
for pollutants without numeric criteria).
The development of an adaptive management and adaptive implementation approach
that will allow proposed controls to be implemented, monitored, refined, and revisited so
that effective implementation of the WRP will be achieved.
Analysis of management measures consisting of facilities, programs, operational
improvements and policies (FPOPs). The prioritization from the RWQMPU was used as
the basis and was revised, as necessary, based on input from the SWWT committees.
The management measures were prioritized based on their potential to result in the
greatest improvement to water quality and habitat. The FPOPs identified as high priority
actions were organized by assessment points, which generally correspond to subwatersheds.
The development of an implementation strategy that includes guidance regarding the
implementation process, implementation schedule, potential funding sources, identified
policy issues and monitoring.
2.6
Summary
This Kinnickinnic River WRP focuses on nonpoint source controls and the management of
polluted stormwater runoff. This plan builds upon initiatives over the past 30 years that were
directed primarily at controlling point source pollution through the implementation of the
Milwaukee Water Pollution Abatement Program and MMSDs Overflow Reduction Plan (Point
Source Plan), which will be completed by 2010. This WRP represents a bottom-up approach
and includes the regulatory actions required under NR 151 and recognizes the importance of
addressing many potential nonpoint pollution sources as well as working across political or
jurisdictional lines. Throughout the development of this WRP, the goal was to identify actions
that would improve water quality in the most cost effective way. As this WRP evolves and is
implemented in the future, regulatory and technical issues will continue to be resolved through
the collaborative efforts of all parties involved in the Kinnickinnic River watershed restoration
planning effort.
2-13
Kinnickinnic River
APPENDIX 2A
2-14
Kinnickinnic River
2-15
Kinnickinnic River
2-16
Kinnickinnic River
2-17
Kinnickinnic River
APPENDIX 2B
2-18
Kinnickinnic River
Fecal Coliform
Watershed
Kinnickinnic
River
Kinnickinnic
River
Assessment
Location
RI-12
RI-13
Measure
Longterm Geometric Mean
Mean
Median
Variance standard - Geomean not to exceed
Variance standard - Less than 10% of all samples / month
Longterm Geometric Mean (Swimming season)
Mean (Swimming season)
Median (Swimming season)
Variance standard - Geomean not to exceed (Swimming
season)
(Swimming season)
(Swimming season)
Longterm Geometric Mean
Mean
Median
Variance standard - Geomean not to exceed
Longterm Geometric Mean (Swimming season)
Mean (Swimming season)
Median (Swimming season)
Variance standard - Geomean not to exceed (Swimming
season)
(Swimming season)
(Swimming season)
Units / Criteria
Revised 2020
Baseline
(No NR 151)
Revised 2020
Baseline
(With NR 151)
Difference
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
Days met (1,000 counts / 100 ml)
% of time standard is met
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
608
4,999
306
261
215
75%
322
3,012
137
560
4,885
295
266
215
75%
295
2,978
116
-48
-114
-11
5
0
0%
-26
-34
-21
-8.2%
-1.1%
-15.6%
148
148
0.3%
110
109
-1
-0.8%

Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
Counts / 100 ml
87%
750
5,049
368
244
216
75%
444
3,031
213
86%
702
4,942
361
250
215
75%
416
2,999
195
-1%
-48
-107
-7
6
-1
0%
-27
-32
-19
138
140
1.7%
111
110
-1
-0.9%
87%
86%
-1%
Note:
Shading indicates the assessment point area is subject to variance standards applying to the designated parameter.
2-19
NR 151
Impact
-7.9%
-2.3%
-3.5%
1.8%
-0.2%
-6.4%
-2.1%
-2.0%
2.6%
-0.5%
-6.2%
-1.1%
-8.7%
Watershed
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic River
Assessment
Location
RI-12
RI-13
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)

Revised 2020
Baseline
Units / Criteria
(No NR 151)
Measure
Revised 2020
Baseline
(With NR 151)
Difference
NR 151 Impact
Median
mg / L
11.4
11.4
0.0
0.0%
Mean
mg / L
11.3
11.3
0.0
0.0%
Variance standard
Days met (2 mg/L)
365
365
0.0%
Variance standard
100%
100%
0%
Median
mg / L
11.5
11.5
0.0
0.0%
Mean
mg / L
11.4
11.4
0.0
0.0%
Variance standard
Days met (2 mg/L)
365
365
0.0%
Variance standard
100%
100%
0%
Revised 2020
Baseline
(With NR 151)
Note:
Shading indicates the assessment point area is subject to variance standards applying to the designated parameter.
Watershed
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic River
Assessment
Location
RI-12
RI-13
Measure

Revised 2020
Baseline
Units / Criteria
(No NR 151)
Difference
NR 151 Impact
Median
mg / L
4.7
3.8
-0.9
-18.9%
Mean
mg / L
13.0
11.4
-1.6
-12.0%
TSS Guideline
Days met (100 mg/L)
343
344
0.2%
Median
mg / L
4.7
3.8
-0.9
-19.2%
Mean
mg / L
11.8
10.4
-1.5
-12.4%
TSS Guideline
Days met (100 mg/L)
347
348
0.2%
2-20
Kinnickinnic River
Total Nitrogen (TN)
Watershed
Assessment
Location
Kinnickinnic River
RI-12
Kinnickinnic River
RI-13
Measure
Units / Criteria
Revised 2020
Baseline
(No NR 151)
Revised 2020
Baseline
(With NR 151)
Difference
NR 151 Impact
Median
mg / L
1.19
1.13
-0.07
-5.7%
Mean
mg / L
1.36
1.30
-0.06
-4.2%
Median
mg / L
1.18
1.12
-0.07
-5.6%
Mean
mg / L
1.32
1.26
-0.06
-4.3%
Total Phosphorus (TP)
Watershed
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic River
Assessment
Location
RI-12
RI-13
Measure
Units
Revised 2020
Baseline
(No NR 151)
Revised 2020
Baseline
(With NR 151)
Difference
NR 151 Impact
Median
mg / L
0.167
0.164
-0.003
-1.9%
Mean
mg / L
0.201
0.198
-0.003
-1.7%
TP Planning Guideline
Days TP met (0.1 mg / L)
33
37
12.8%
24%
25%
1%
Median
mg / L
0.160
0.157
-0.003
Mean
mg / L
0.191
0.188
-0.003
-1.7%
Days TP met (0.1 mg / L)
45
50
12.0%
27%
27%
1%
Revised 2020
Baseline
(No NR 151)
Revised 2020
Baseline
(With NR 151)
-2.0%
Copper
Watershed
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic River
Assessment
Location
RI-12
RI-13
Difference
NR 151 Impact
Median
Measure
mg / L
Units
0.0020
0.0017
0.000
-13.6%
Mean
mg / L
0.0043
0.0040
0.000
-7.6%
Median
mg / L
0.0020
0.0017
0.000
-13.2%
Mean
mg / L
0.0044
0.0040
0.000
-7.4%
2-21
Kinnickinnic River
Chapter 3: Build Partnerships

3.1
Stakeholders for the Watershed Restoration Plan
As the watershed restoration planning effort was initiated, the Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District (MMSD) decided to use the newly formed Southeastern Wisconsin
Watersheds Trust, Inc. (SWWT) as the stakeholder group for the effort. The SWWT is the ideal
stakeholder group because it was formed to improve water quality throughout the greater
Milwaukee watersheds (GMW), and the goal of this watershed restoration plan (WRP) is to
develop the next steps to be initiated to improve water quality in the Kinnickinnic River
watershed.
The watershed restoration planning process is an ongoing collaborative effort. Work to date has
included the following:
Identification of key stakeholders
Identification of issues of concern
Establishment of preliminary goals
Development of indicators
Implementation of public outreach
Building partnerships is the cornerstone of the SWWT and its mission is one of collaboration to
achieve healthy and sustainable water resources throughout the GMW. The SWWT is building
an active membership of organizations committed to its mission, purposes, and goals.
Participation is open to a large membership of diverse non-traditional stakeholders that actively
participate in all activities of the SWWT and take personal and community responsibility to
improve our water resources.
The SWWT collaborates with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as part of this effort and
has specifically identified five activities to help restore the watersheds in southeastern
Wisconsin. For each activity, specific objectives, tasks, and measurable outcomes are defined.
The activities and participating organizations are listed below.
1) Perform monitoring, modeling, and science work (Milwaukee Riverkeeper, Clean
Wisconsin, River Alliance of Wisconsin)
2) Participate in the development and implementation of the WRP (Milwaukee Riverkeeper,
Clean Wisconsin, River Alliance of Wisconsin, 1000 Friends of Wisconsin, River
Revitalization Foundation, Sixteenth Street Community Health Center)
3) Initiate legal and policy implementation of the WRP (Midwest Environmental Advocates,
Sixteenth Street Community Health Center and Clean Wisconsin)
4) Develop an outreach and communications strategy (1000 Friends of Wisconsin, Clean
Wisconsin, Milwaukee Riverkeeper, Midwest Environmental Advocates)
3-1
Kinnickinnic River
5) Provide SWWT administration and committee support (create an integrated and long
lasting structure that supports watershed restoration across municipal and organizational
boundaries)
3.2
Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc.
The SWWT and its committee members are the stakeholders for this WRP and provide the
structure for ongoing engagement and action. The SWWT is comprised of members who are
committed to actively and publicly support the mission, goals, and objectives of the SWWT as
established by its members and approved and amended by the Executive Steering Council (ESC).
Initially, a list of potential stakeholders in all the watersheds was compiled, including NGOs,
municipalities, permit holders, universities, industries, and others as part of the restoration
planning effort. Potential stakeholders were invited to participate on Watershed Action Teams
(WAT)s. Appendix 3A lists the groups invited to participate.
FIGURE 3-1: SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN WATERSHEDS TRUST, INC. MEMBERS
As shown in Figure 3-1, the SWWT consists of a general membership and four main
committees: Executive Steering Council, Science Committee, Policy Committee, and the
Watershed Action Teams. The functions and members of the committees are discussed in
subsections 3.2.1 3.2.4 below. When the SWWT was first developed in February 2008, an
organizing committee appointed the members of the SWWT Executive Steering Council. Soon
thereafter, the Executive Steering Council appointed the Science Committee. The Science
Committee established a Modeling Subcommittee to collaborate on water quality modeling
issues and a Habitat Subcommittee to develop preliminary ideas on habitat-related watershed
improvements. The SWWT formed two Watershed Action Teams - one for the Menomonee
River watershed and one for the Kinnickinnic River watershed. Each Watershed Action Team
has a set of co-chairs.
3-2
Kinnickinnic River
The SWWT members filling committee roles may include independent units of government,
special purpose districts, agencies, organizations, companies, and members at large. Members
may be asked to commit institutional resources to help fulfill the mission, goals, and objectives
adopted by the SWWT. In return, members expect collaborative actions that work toward
achieving healthy and sustainable water resources that benefit them and any constituents they
might represent.
Upon initiating this WRP, the project team (consultants and MMSD staff) worked with the
SWWT and met with the ESC, WATs and the Science Committee. Several general meetings
were held with the ESC at the beginning of the project. From October 2008 to March 2010, nine
meetings were held with the Science Committee, one meeting was held with the modeling
subcommittee, four meetings were held jointly with the Menomonee River WAT and the
Kinnickinnic River WAT, and five meetings were held separately with the Kinnickinnic River
WAT. Several meetings were also held with the SWWT committee chairs during this time.
As noted above, the members of the committees are listed in subsections 3.2.1 3.2.4 below.
The lists provided reflect the participating committee members as they existed at the time the
WRP was developed. It is anticipated that the SWWT website will maintain the most up-to-date
membership lists, as membership is anticipated to change over time.
3.2.1 Executive Steering Council
The SWWT is managed by a subset of its participant members on the ESC. The 15 member
ESC undertakes management and administrative functions of the SWWT. The council uses
input from the WATs to review annual watershed priority lists of projects and programs
supported by the SWWT. The ESC considers and recommends projects to undertake and fund at
the watershed or subwatershed level and monitors and reports on project results.
Membership of the ESC is listed below.
Preston Cole, City of Milwaukee
Ken Yunker, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC)
Nancy Frank, Acting Chair, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Tom Grisa, City of Brookfield
Henry Hamilton III, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP) - Milwaukee Branch
Andy Holschbach, Ozaukee County
David Lee, We Energies
Scott Mathie, Metropolitan Builders Association
Peter McAvoy, Sixteenth Street Community Health Center
Christine Nuernberg, City of Mequon
Neil Palmer, Village of Elm Grove
Kevin Shafer, MMSD
3-3
Kinnickinnic River
Reggie Newson, Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT)

Dan Stoffel, Washington County Board
Sharon Gayan, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) (non-voting
member)
Meeting dates: October 8, 2008; December 3, 2008; January 14, 2009; February 11, 2009; April
8, 2009; June 10, 2009; August 12, 2009; October 14, 2009; December 9, 2009; February 10,
2010.
3.2.2 Science Committee, Modeling, and Habitat Subcommittees
The Science Advisory Committee advises the SWWT ESC on important science and technical
issues. The committee ensures that a wide range of interests are considered in scientific
discussions and focuses on issues of a scientific and technical nature to achieve watershed
objectives. The Science Committee identifies and makes recommendations on scientific and
technical issues, including identifying areas where further study is necessary. It also provides
scientific and technical input to project selection, project progress monitoring, and watershed/
subwatershed project implementation.
The following are members of the Science Committee:
Cheryl Nenn, Milwaukee Riverkeeper
Chris Clayton, River Alliance of Wisconsin
Chris Magruder, MMSD
Claus Dunkelberg, Milwaukee 7 Water Council
Eric Loucks, AECOM
Ezra Meyer, Vice Chair, Clean Wisconsin
Ginny Plumeau, Cedarburg Science, LLC
Jennifer Runquist, League of Women Voters
Marsha Burzynski, WDNR
Mike Hahn, SEWPRC
Peter Hughes, United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Sandra McLellan, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Great Lakes WATER Institute
(GLWI)
Steve Melching, Marquette University
Tim Ehlinger, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee,
Tony Remsen, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, GLWI (retired)
Val Klump, Chair, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Director GLWI
3-4
Kinnickinnic River
Meeting dates: October 28, 2008; January 20, 2009; March 4, 2009; April 9, 2009; May 14,
2009; July 30, 2009; September 28, 2009; November 18, 2009; and December 15, 2009.
The Modeling Subcommittee members are listed below.
Cheryl Nenn, Milwaukee Riverkeeper
Claus Dunkelberg, Milwaukee 7 Water Council
Eric Loucks, AECOM
Ezra Meyer, Clean Wisconsin
Ginny Plumeau, Cedarburg Science, LLC
Jennifer Runquist, League of Women Voters
John Hoopes, University of Wisconsin - Madison
Ken Potter, University of Wisconsin - Madison
Mike Hahn, SEWRPC
Peter Hughes, USGS
Peter Taglia, Clean Wisconsin
Sandra McLellan, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, GLWI
Tim Ehlinger, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee
Tony Remsen, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, GLWI (retired)
Meeting date: February 18, 2008.
The Habitat Subcommittee members are listed below.
Tom Slawski, SEWRPC
Tim Ehlinger, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee
The Habitat Subcommittee met on a weekly basis with various representatives from MMSD,
WDNR, USGS, and staff from the universities to obtain data and information as well as discuss
issues relevant to the biological communities and habitat within the Kinnickinnic and
Menomonee River watersheds. In addition, this subcommittee regularly attended the
3-5
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River Watershed Action Team meetings to share results and
discuss ideas related to habitat issues within each watershed and potential mitigation strategies
and remedial actions. This subcommittee met informally during the period May 2009 through
December 2009.
3.2.3 Watershed Action Teams
The WATs advise the SWWT ESC on important watershed-specific issues pertaining to its
activities and implement projects either as a body or by enabling its member organizations. In
fulfilling its roles, the WATs perform the following tasks:
1) Ensure that a wide range of interests are considered in all watershed discussions.
2) Focus on issues that cut across existing lines of authority to achieve watershed objectives.
3) Work with SEWRPC to develop this WRP.
4) Identify issues and prepare a priority list of watershed-specific projects and programs to
be supported by the SWWT, based on this WRP. Recommend this list to the ESC for
their review and approval.
5) Identify and make recommendations on watershed-specific issues.
6) Undertake projects or advise on member projects that have been awarded by the ESC.
7) Record WAT meeting notes and report to the ESC.
The following co-chairs were elected to lead the Kinnickinnic WAT:
Ben Gramling, Sixteenth Street Community Health Center
Ben Sykes, Foley & Lardner LLP
The membership list is included in Appendix 3B.
Joint meeting dates with the Menomonee River WAT: November 11, 2008; December 8, 2008;
February 2, 2009; and May 5, 2009. Separate meeting dates: August 4, 2009; September 21,
2009; October 20, 2009; November 19, 2009; and March 16, 2010.
3.2.4 Policy Committee
The Policy Committee advises the SWWT ESC on important public policy and legal issues
pertaining to its activities. The Policy Committee performs the following tasks:
1) Ensure that a wide range of interests are considered in all public policy and legal
discussions
2) Focus on issues that cut across existing lines of authority to achieve watershed objectives
3) Identify and make recommendations on public policy and legal issues
4) Record Policy Committee meeting notes and report to the ESC
The Policy Committee members are listed below.
Peter McAvoy, Chair - South Sixteen Community Health Center
Dan Collins, Elutions
3-6
Kinnickinnic River
James Fratrick, WDNR

Shawn Graff, Ozaukee Washington Land Trust
Susan Greenfield, Root-Pike Watershed Initiative Network
Henry Hamilton, NAACP
Jill Hapner, Washington County Land Conservation
Andy Holschbach, Ozaukee County
Steve Keith, Milwaukee County
Bruce Keyes, Foley & Lardner LLP
Scott Mathie, Metropolitan Builders Association
Ezra Meyer, Clean Wisconsin
Mike Murphy, City of Milwaukee Alderman
Neil Palmer, Village of Elm Grove
Melissa Scanlan, Midwest Environmental Advocates
Kevin Shafer, MMSD
Ken Yunker, SEWRPC
3.3
Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. Linked Goals (concurrent with
Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update Pollutant Reduction Goals)
In order to establish goals for this WRP, the ESC suggested combining the goals established by
the SWWT and the goals from SEWRPCs Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update
(RWQMPU). A document entitled Linked Goals and Objectives for the Southeastern Wisconsin
Watersheds Trust, Inc. and SEWRPCs Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update was
developed in April 2009. In order to continuously focus and strive to accomplish its mission, the
SWWT developed and approved the following four goals:
1) Make measurable progress toward improving the water resources in the region
2) Identify/support land use practices and designs that enhance/improve water resources and
promote and restore ecological benefits
3) Forge and strengthen relationships to leverage funding and recommend policies to assist
in the implementation of projects to produce lasting water resource benefits and cost
savings throughout the GMW and nearshore Lake Michigan
4) Implement cost-effective projects that result in measurable improvements in water quality
and water resources
3-7
Kinnickinnic River
The focus of the SWWT is on implementing these goals; however, the SWWT recognizes that its
efforts must build on the goals, objectives, and recommendations of SEWRPCs RWQMPU.1
The RWQMPU provides a relevant and transparent foundation for moving forward.
Below is a detailed listing of the RWQMPUs measurable water quality improvement goals for
the Kinnickinnic River watershed and its objective categories paired to an extensive list of
recommendations and/or implementation strategies. Programs and projects supported by the
SWWT were evaluated relative to their potential to make progress toward these measurable
goals.
Measurable Water Quality Improvement Goals
In general, the degree of improvement in water quality resulting from implementation of the
plans recommendations will be evaluated through comparison of existing vs. future measured
water quality conditions. These measurable goals can serve as indicators of progress being made
toward improving water quality conditions. The goals range from changes to land use, pollutant
load reductions and improvements to habitat and aesthetics.
Note on using aesthetics with habitat as a goal. While a consensus was reached during the
development of the WRP by the Kinnickinnic WAT to include aesthetic improvement with
habitat as a goal, it is recognized that aesthetic improvement does not always translate to
ecologically-based (habitat) improvement. The use of aesthetics as a goal does present a
challenge in some cases because criteria for aesthetic improvement vary among people and over
time. For example, a concrete-lined channel with managed turf in the riparian area adjacent to
accessible parking may be perceived as aesthetically-ideal to some, but as sterile to others.
Alternatively, a naturalized stream that courses through a wide, wooded riparian corridor has
improved ecological function, but may present challenges in terms of litter control, maintenance
and law enforcement. This WRP acknowledges that aesthetic improvement does not always
relate directly to water quality or habitat improvement, but in many cases they are all linked. In
addition, aesthetic improvement is strongly related to quality of life issues and environmental
justice issues. For the purpose of this WRP, aesthetic improvement impacts amenity value,
personal relationships to the resource, and community connections necessary to provide the
financial resources necessary to address habitat and water quality concerns.
The preceding goals that are to be achieved by 2020 can be reviewed in the Plan Summary of the
RWQMPU, which details the goals for the entire RWQMPU.2
Specific to the Kinnickinnic River watershed, the RWQMPU goals are the following:
1) Habitat/Aesthetics Improvements
a. Renovating and rehabilitating concrete channels where concrete lining removal
can be accomplished without creating flood or erosion hazards
1
SEWRPC implements Section 208 of the federal Clean Water Act toward the goal of achieving water use
objectives for surface waters within the region through a sound and workable plan for the abatement of water
pollution.
2
SEWRPC, A Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update for the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, Plan
Summary, http://www.sewrpc.org/publications/planningprogramreport/pr-050_summary_water_quality_plan_
greater_mke_watersheds.pdf (revised January 2009)
3-8
Kinnickinnic River
b. Considering renovation of the MMSD Kinnickinnic River Flushing Station

c. Preparing abandonment and associated riverine restoration plans for dams,
specifically addressing sedimentation issues
d. Limiting culverts, bridges, drop structures, and channelized stream segments and
designing such necessary features to allow the passage of aquatic organisms
e. Developing restoration and remediation programs for riverine and impoundment
sites with contaminated sediments
f. Implementing the Kinnickinnic River Environmental Restoration Project, which
will result in the removal of up to 170,000 cubic yards of sediments contaminated
with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), removing about 90 percent of the PCB mass in the project area, during
2008 and 2009
g. Expanding the existing Jones Island Confined Disposal Facility by constructing a
raised perimeter dike, consistent with the 2007 recommendation of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Detroit District
h. Improving the habitat of stream systems by accomplishing the following:
Enhancing streambank stability
Limiting instream sediment deposition
Implementing techniques to moderate the effects of channelization
Restoring instream and riparian habitat
2) Pollutant Load Reduction Goals
Based upon the comparison of the Year 2020 (the estimated future condition as defined in
Chapter 4) and the Baseline Year 2000 (the existing condition as defined in Chapter 4), the
following pollutants load reductions are estimated for the Kinnickinnic River watershed:
a) Total Phosphorus:
20% (2,600 pound reduction)
b) Total Suspended Solids (TSS):
23% (1.2 million pound reduction)
c) Fecal Coliform Bacteria:
52% (2,600 trillion cell reduction)
d) Total Nitrogen:
12% (9,000 pound reduction)
e) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD): 14% (58,000 pound reduction)

f) Copper:
19% (107 pound reduction)
The breakdown of the load reductions for each of the major components of the RWQMPU is
presented in Section 6.2 of Chapter 6 of this WRP. The modeled Baseline 2000 and Year 2020
water quality assessments are presented in Section 6.4 of chapter 6. Section 6.4 presents
assessments of flashiness, fecal coliform, TSS, total phosphorus, and dissolved oxygen (DO).
The assessments are based on the percentage of time in compliance with either water quality
standards or targets.
3-9
Kinnickinnic River
It is important to note that achieving these goals will not meet water quality standards at every
location in the watershed, 365 days per year. As explained in Chapter XI of the RWQMPU
(Planning Report No. 50) achieving the goals for BOD would generally result in a high level of
compliance (defined as compliance 85% of the time or greater) with the water quality standards
and more moderate compliance for phosphorus and TSS. Achieving the fecal coliform load
reduction goal would generally result in a high level of compliance with the standards during the
summer months, but a low degree of compliance is expected when looking at data for the full
year. Based on the model results, in order to meet all of the fecal coliform standards 100% of the
time in all areas of the watershed, over 90% of the total load would need to be reduced.
Note, for the RWQMPU, the variance standards were used for DO and fecal coliform where
applicable. For the WRP analysis, the SWWT committees decided to look at compliance
assuming the variance standards did not apply. Therefore, the results shown in Chapter 6 of the
WRP do not show as much of an increase as the results of the RWQMPU for fecal coliform and
DO. However, reaching the goals listed above is one of the first steps in improving water quality
and habitat in the watershed. It is anticipated that additional work will follow as the adaptive
watershed management approach is implemented.
To get a sense of what achieving the water quality standards means, the RWQMPU links the
water quality objectives to the water use objectives. In general, the Kinnickinnic River is
classified as a warm water fishery. Therefore, meeting the water quality standards should allow
the river to support fish such as walleye and bass. However, there are other factors, such as
habitat, that need to be considered when predicting the type of aquatic life that could potentially
be sustained.
3.3.1 Watershed Action Team Visioning Session
The Kinnickinnic River WAT participated in a visioning session in December 2008. The
purpose of this session was not to determine specific goals or objectives, but to determine the
parameters on which the WRP should focus. Project team staff asked the following three
questions to help discover values-based water resource expectations of the members:
How do you want the Kinnickinnic River to look?
What activities do (or would) you like to do in the Kinnickinnic River?
On behalf of aquatic and plant life, what do you think the Kinnickinnic River needs?
While some respondents directly answered the questions and others responded more generally, it
was staffs opinion that answers were generally in line with recommendations of the RWQMPU.
The compiled list of responses that was developed from the WAT visioning session and
considered by the Science Committee is shown below.
Manmade channels:
Concrete channels
3-10
Kinnickinnic River
Remove concrete channels in the Kinnickinnic River (See Chapter V of SEWRPC

Technical Report No. 39 for locations of drop structures and concrete-lined channels
in the Kinnickinnic River)3
Consider erosion control
Streams should be daylighted (remove streams from enclosed conduit); however,

consider safety and unintended consequences (e.g., flooding)
Need to think about safety vs. vistas and drawing people to the river
Make the Kinnickinnic River look like a river and not like a drainage ditch
In-stream conditions:
Eliminate barriers to fish passage (add fish ladders)
Reduce litter via programs (i.e., source control)
Introduce environmentally-friendly sheet piling and bulkheads
Reduce algae blooms
Remove sediment island south of Lincoln Avenue (if not natural)
Limit motor boat use upstream of Becher Street
Increase diversity and complexity to the system
Riparian areas:
Remove structures from riparian areas that are also located within the floodplain.
Protect/restore riparian habitat and use diverse, native vegetation
Provide increased riparian areas (i.e., buffers); 120 minimum
Construct, treat and restore wetlands
Improve public access to the river; mandate public access with any new development
(indirect improvement through increased recreational use, awareness of, and connection
to the river)
Implement mandates to address imperviousness with new development and
redevelopment
Remove coal pile at the port or provide a buffer between the pile and the river (if
possible)
Create more trails along river
Implement geese management and gull management, if applicable
SEWRPC, Water Quality Conditions and Sources of Pollution in the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, Technical
Report No. 39, Chapter V, Surface Water Quality Conditions and Sources of Pollution in the Kinnickinnic River
Watershed (November 2007)
3-11
Kinnickinnic River
In-stream and riparian areas:

Restore native species and remove invasive species
Use less road salt
Desired uses:
Kayaking/canoeing with access points identified
Fishing of a quality that provides fish for human consumption
Live by the river
Bird watching
Overarching and vision:
Education tool for public and children
Signage that is sensitive to the existing environment
Interpretive signage for safety and historical appreciation, that is done well
Vision: Kinnickinnic River is an integral part of the community that supports life and
public health; view river as an asset
Usage
o Conduct studies that consider usage and density
o Manage usage (provide plan and an entity to manage)
3.3.2 Watershed Restoration Plan Focus Areas
The Science Committee used the input from the WAT visioning session to determine parameters
that should be focused on in the WRP that would help address the input received from the
WATs. They also determined what should be recommended for future analysis. The following
parameters were recommended to be focused on in the WRP:
1) Bacteria/Public health - concentrate on determining unknown or unidentified sources,
failing sanitary sewer infrastructure and illicit connections, and achieving reductions and
compliance with water quality standards in warm weather months
2) Habitat/aesthetics - concrete channels and enclosed channels are poor for aquatic life and
for downstream hydrology; however, flooding considerations must be taken into account.
See Section 3.3 above for a discussion of the importance of considering aesthetics and the
indirect impact of aesthetics on the rivers water quality and habitat. The restoration of
watersheds should include buffers, if possible, and consider the following parameters:
Chloride (harmful to aquatic life)
TSS
Sediment
DO/BOD
3-12
Kinnickinnic River
Water temperature
Trash - defined as pet litter, waterfowl impacts, and refuse with the
understanding that there is some overlap with other pollutants
Flow/flood impacts
3) Nutrients (Phosphorus) - While there do not appear to be many problems with algal
growth within the watershed, phosphorus has been identified as an issue along the
nearshore area of Lake Michigan.
The management strategies also consider nitrogen, copper, legacy pollutants such as
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and emerging contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and
personal care products (PPCPs). However, these pollutants are not a primary focus for the WRP
and should be addressed in future studies.
The use of real-time data was stressed as an important implementation tool. The USGS and
MMSD have installed monitoring facilities at select locations along the Kinnickinnic River.
These facilities provide water quality, temperature, and flow data to resource managers on a realtime basis. The availability of real-time data facilitates an improved understanding of stream
parameters under varied conditions. The USGS posts real-time monitoring data for Wisconsin at
the following website:
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wi/nwis/current/?type=quality.
3.3.3 Habitat Considerations
Preliminary water pollution goals from the RWQMPU did not directly address habitat
improvement. However, the RWQMPU did recommend restoration of prairies and wetlands and
the establishment or expansion of riparian buffers.
3.4
Education and Outreach
A strong information and education component enhances public understanding of both watershed
planning and the project and encourages early and continued participation. Efforts include work
by SEWRPC, MMSD, SWWT, and others.
3.4.1 Internet
Online resources throughout the region include web pages launched and maintained by
SEWRPC, MMSD, SWWT, USGS, and others.
The SEWRPC maintains a web page for the RWQMPU (http://sewrpc.org/waterqualityplan/)
that documents the plan update process consistent with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agencys (USEPAs) watershed planning process. Topics documented include an overview
section, planning background, the current effort, public involvement, study meetings, advisory
committees, final plan summary, plan chapters, environmental corridors, yard care, related fact
3-13
Kinnickinnic River
sheets, links, and contact information. The final RWQMPU report and the companion technical
report are available on the web site.4,5 The website includes opportunities to contact staff.
The MMSD website for the 2020 Facilities Plan planning process was used intensively by
committees, citizens, and stakeholders and afforded the opportunity to comment on documents as
they were drafted. The MMSD continues to maintain the project website at
http://www.mmsd.com/wqi/. The site includes background on the project, a record of committee
activities, information about watersheds, presentations, publications, links, and contact
information.
In the spring of 2009, the MMSD launched an online tool called H2O Info that tracks water
quality indicators on a real-time basis. On this interactive site, users can click on a monitoring
location on a map and view data that are virtually real time and chart data over time. The
MMSD collects data with remote sensors and transmits it in cooperation with the USGS and then
posts the data to the H2O Info website. Water quality variables tracked include conductivity,
DO, turbidity, water temperature, flow (discharge), and stage. Precipitation data are also
available from several precipitation monitoring stations.
The SWWT website (http://www.swwtwater.org/) documents the formation of the group, posts
meeting information, and provides technical information. It includes a calendar of events,
publications, project listings, and lists committee members and activities. The MMSD hosts an
E-forum, accessible through the SWWT website, which is a tool designed to enable stakeholders
to participate in online discussions. The E-forum (http://www.swwtwater.org/swwtforum/) may
be used by all committee members to share information, discuss concepts, and comment on draft
documents, such as the WRP, as they are developed.
3.4.2 Watershed Booklets
As a precursor to the WAT meetings, the MMSD produced a booklet about each watershed that
included information about the status of the water quality within the watershed, the geography of
the watershed, and information about what local governments, the MMSD, and others are doing
to improve water quality. These booklets also outlined additional actions that individuals and
groups could do to further advance improvements to water quality.
3.4.3 Annual Conference
The annual Clean Rivers Clean Lakes conference is attended by hundreds of people dedicated to
improving the regions water quality. Originally convened by the MMSD, SEWRPC and others
as part of the Water Quality Initiative, 2009 marks its 6th year. The event draws people involved
in many aspects of water resource management and protection including scientists, regulators,
planners, elected officials, engineers, developers, environmentalists, and community activists.
SEWRPC, A Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update for the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, Planning
Report No. 50 (December 5, 2007)
5
SEWRPC, Water Quality Conditions and Sources of Pollution in the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, Technical
Report No. 39 (November 2007)
3-14
Kinnickinnic River
3.4.4 Other Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. Education and Outreach
Initiatives
The SWWT education and outreach materials and tools can be used by municipalities and
counties throughout the watersheds. This ultimately may include an information and education
curriculum for elected officials as well as a communication plan. Print or electronic publications
may include an annual magazine, periodic newsletters, and special topic newsletters focusing on
critical habitat and WAT efforts and results. Ultimately, SWWT envisions development of an
annual water-quality report card for all the watersheds, based on agreed-upon parameters and
measured data.
3-15
APPENDIX A
Name
Rebecca Abraham
Jen Adams
Sharon Adams
David Ahern
Matt Aho
Todd Ambs
Fay Amerson
Eric Anderson
Pehr Anderson
Kathryn Anderson
Kris Andrews
Else Ankel
Martin Aquino
Bette Arey
Lori Artiomow
Steve Atwell
Richard Badger
Karen Baker Mathu
Dana Baldwin
Lyle Balistreri
Brenda Bantz
Scott Baran
Richard Barloga
Thomas Barrett
Alan Barrows
Timothy Bate
Fran Beach
Jill Bedford
Matthew Bednarski
Barbara Behlke
Peter Beitzel
Solomon Bekele
Randy Belanger
John Bennett
Bernadette Berdes
Belle Bergner
Kristina Betzold
Tony Beyer
Bob Biebel
John Bielinski
Greg Bird
Tim Birkel
Paul Boersma
Steve Boettcher
Affiliation
River Revitalization Foundation
Milwaukee Water Works
Walnut Way Conservation Corporation
Ahern Engineering Co.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources - Division of Water
Walworth County
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Silicon Pastures
UW-Extension
UW System Administration
Urban Ecology Center
City of Milwaukee
Kettle Moraine Land Trust
Discovery World
Office of State Senator Lena Taylor
Bay Ridge Consulting
Great Lakes Water Institute
Milwaukee Building Trades Council
City of Milwaukee - Environmental Services
Milwaukee Area Land Conservancy
Mayor, City of Milwaukee
Waukesha County
Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District
Drumlin Area Land Trust
Bonestroo
Behlke Consulting, Inc.
Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce
City of Milwaukee Department of Public Works
Visu-Sewer Clean & Seal, Inc
City of Franklin
Village of Mount Pleasant
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission
City of Cudahy
HNTB Corporation
Boettcher Media Group
Appendix 3A
INVITED PARTICIPANTS - KK
WATERSHED ACTION TEAM
Kinnickinnic River WRP
.]
Name
Curt Bolton
Doug Booth
Harvey Bootsma
Ted Bosch
Joe Boxhorn
Owen Boyle
Stephen Branca
Scott Brandmeier
Douglas Brandon
Todd Breiby
Todd Brennon
Steve Brick
Joe A. Brieske
Carrie Bristoll-Groll
Elda Brizuela
Gerry Broderick
John Broihahn
Lane Brostom
Lesley Brotkowski
Irene Brown
Jeff Browne
Ann Brummitt
Patricia Brust
Michelle Bryant
Susan Buchanan
Anthony Bunkelman
Tom Bunker
Joseph M. Burtch
Marsha Burzynski
Vince Bushell
Jim Buske
Leeann Butschlick
Carolyn Byrne
Michael Campbell
Fredy Canales
Bill Carity
Mike Carlson
Jason Carlson
John Carlson
Julie Carpenter
Alan Carter
Patrick G. Casey
Libby Cavanaugh
Teresa Caven
James V. Celano, III
Affiliation
City of Greenfield
Johnson Foundation
Village of Fox Point
Wisconsin Coastal Management Program
Pier Wisconsin
The Joyce Foundation
Bonestroo
Stormwater Solutions Engineering, LLC
Conservationist/ Filmaker
Milwaukee County
TechStar
Cedarburg Science, LLC
Public Policy Forum
Milwaukee River Work Group
Wisconsin State Senate
Tall Pines Conservancy
Caledonia Storm Sewer Utility District Commission
City of Racine
City of West Allis
Village of Brown Deer
Village of Shorewood
Village of Elm Grove
Carity Land Corporation
Gathering Waters Conservancy
Applied Ecological Services, Inc.
City of Brookfield
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
Village of West Milwaukee
City of Brookfield
Geneva Lake Conservancy
Appendix 3A
.]
Name
Rita Cestaric
Jeff Chase
Doug Cherkauer
Erik Christensen
Barbara Chudnow
Jerry Chudzik
Tom Churchill
Jim Ciha
Margaret Clark
Louise Clemency
Preston Cole
John Colletti
Lisa Conley
Nancy Counter
Michael Cudahy
Angela Curtes
Eddee Daniel
Jean Davidson
Lou Davit
Troy Deibert
Melinda Dejewski
Sara DeKok
Robert Dennik
Lynn Des Jardins
Jeanne DeSimone Sieger
Dennis Devitt
Sandy DeWalt
Matt Diebel
Carol Diggelman
Frank Dombrowski
Kae DonLevy
JoEllen Donovan
Mary Beth Drapp
Mary Beth Driscoll
James Drought
Carol Drury
Thomas Dunbar
Clare Dundon
Claus Dunkelberg
Mike DuPont
Tony Earl
Dave Eastman
Jon Edgren
Jeff Edstrom
Scott Edwards
Affiliation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
City of Brookfield
South Shore Park Watch
Graef, Anhalt, Schloemer & Associates, Inc.
Milwaukee County Parks
Black & Veatch, Inc.
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5
Town & Country Resource Conservation and Development
Corporation
First Weber Group Foundation, Inc.
The Endeavors Group, LLC
Yggdrasil Land Foundation
Friends of Milwaukee's Rivers
HNTB Corporation
City of St. Francis
Executive Office Milwaukee County
Medical College of Wisconsin Research Foundation
Caledonia Conservancy
The Cadmus Group, Inc.
Milwaukee School of Engineering
We Energies
Pier Wisconsin
Bonestroo
Medical College of Wisconsin
Groundwork Milwaukee, Inc
Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc.
Center for Resilient Cities
Town of Delafield Plan Commission
Milwaukee 7 Water Council
MWH Americas
Governor - Retired
City of Glendale
Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.
Geosyntec Consultants
Veolia Water Milwaukee, LLC
Appendix 3A
Name
Susan Eichelkraut
Mustafa Emir
Jim Engelhardt
Gail Epping Overholt
Russell C. Evans
Greg Failey
Fred Fairbanks
Craig Faucett
Mark Feider
Mary Feind
Robert L. Feind
Daniel Feinstein
Beth Fetterley
Steven A. Finch
Molly Flanagan
Jeffrey Foran
Jeff Fortin
Pamela Foster Felt
David Fowler
Nancy Frank
Ernst-Ulrich Franzen
Jim Fratrick
Krystal Freimark
Mike Friis
Jeri Gabrielson
Steve Gaffield
Steve Galarneau
Sharon Gayan
Danni Gendelman
Doran Gendelman
Ellen Gennrich
Jim Gennrich
Al Ghorbanpoor
Kimberly A Gleffe
Steven A. Godfrey
Pam Golanowski
Jessica Goldsberry
Willie Gonwa
Joe Gorecki
Dave Graczyk
Shawn Graff
Benjamin Gramling
Susan S. Greenfield
Tom Grisa
Laura Gronek
Affiliation
Bonestroo
Clark Dietz, Inc.
University of Wisconsin-Extension Basin Education Initiative
Waukesha County Environmental Action League
General Mitchell Airport
City of Oak Creek
City of Cudahy
Glendale Natural Areas Regreen Project
U.S. Geological Survey

HNTB Corporation
The Joyce Foundation
Midwest Center for Environmenatl Science
City of Oak Creek
Association of State Floodplain Managers
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Racine County Planning & Development
Wisconsin Department of Administration
Office of Senator Russell D. Feingold
Montgomery Associates Resource Solutions, LLC
Citizen, Environmentalist
Discovery World at Pier Wisconsin
Waukesha County Land Conservancy
Friends of Milwaukee's Rivers
Baxter & Woodman, Inc.
Marquette University
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Field Station
Symbiont Engineering
Ozaukee/Washington County Land Trust
Sixteenth Street Community Health Center
City of Brookfield
Appendix 3A
M.]
Name
Barry Grossman
Tim Grundl
David Grusznski
Kim Grveles
Dennis Grzezinski
Rob Guilbert
John Hacker
Bill Hafs
Affiliation
Foley & Lardner, LLP
The Conservation Fund
Assurant Health Foundation
Mike Hahn
Carol Hale
Kevin Haley
Nathan Hanisko
Delene Hanson
Jill Hapner
Joyce Harms
Arthur Harrington
Gregg Harris
Rose Hass Leider
Chuck Haubrich
Wendy Hauser
Joel Hawkins
Joan Hawley
Ronald Hayward
Brian Heard
Thomas Hefty
Ronald Heinritz
William Hendee
Patrick Henderson
Jessie L. Henderson
Nicole Hewitt
Patricia Hidson
Jaren Hiller
Nathan Hinch
Tom Hoffman
Norman Holman
William Hoppe
Brian Hornickle
Jeanne Hossenlopp
Will Hoyer
Randy Hoyt
Jessica Hrobar
Stacy Hron
Peter Hughes
Brett Hulsey
John Idzikowski

Global Green Cross
Washington County
Veolia Water, LLC
Godfrey & Kahn, S.C.
Ozaukee County Board
Kenosha/Racine Land Trust
Greater Milwaukee Committee
Village of Bayside
Superior Engineering, LLC
Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren s.c.
Village of Thiensville
Office of the Governor - Wisconsin
R.A. Smith National, Inc.
City of New Berlin
Brown County Land Conservation Dept.
AECOM
Sheaffer International
Village of Menomonee Falls
Wisconsin Association for Biomedical Research & Education
City of Mequon
Clean Wisconsin
Arnold & O'Sheridan, Inc.
Miller Engineers & Scientists
Better Environmental Solutions
Appendix 3A
.]
Names
Nader Jaber
Anthony Jackson
Jeffrey J. Jacobson
Steve Jacquart
Christopher Jaekels
Aaron Jahncke
Jeramey Jannene
John Jansen
Thomas Jansen
Stanley Jaskolski
Debra Jensen
Jason Jentzsch
Jennifer Johanson
Timothy John
Rolf Johnson
Arlyn Johnson
Annie Jones
Warren Jones
Harald Jordahl
Robert Karnauskas
Brian Kasprzyk
Jim Keegan
Steve Keith
Greg Kessler
Lynn Ketterhagen
Kevin Kimmes
Darcy Kind
Kathleen King
John Kirchgeorg
Rebecca Klaper
Michele Klappa-Sullivan
Dave Klemer
Scott Kloskowski
Val Klump
Russell Knetzger
Tom Koepp
Peg Kohring
Brandon Koltz
James Koneazny
Gary Korb
Nik Kovac
Greg Kowalski
Laura Kracum
Paul Krajniak
Kris Krause
Affiliation
Wisconsin State Fair Park
Village of Whitefish Bay
UrbanMilwaukee.com
Ruekert-Mielke, Inc.
We Energies
EN2 Solutions, LLC
Alverno College
Agua Media & Exhibit International
Kenosha County University of Wisconsin-Extension
City of Milwaukee Housing Authority
BL3 Strategies, LLC
Milwaukee County Park System
Milwaukee County Department of Public Works
City of New Berlin
Geneva Lake Conservancy
Propex, Inc.
Life Corporation
Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC
City of Muskego
City & Town Plans
Ruekert & Mielke, Inc.
Symbiont
University of Wisconsin Extension / Southeastern Wisconsin Regional
Planning Commisison
City of Milwaukee
West Wisconsin Land Trust
Discovery World
WE Energies
Appendix 3A
Name
Timothy Kriewall
William Krill
Raymond Krueger
Andrew Kurth
Andy LaFond
John Lammers
Mary Lou Lamonda
Rebecca Lane
Dan Lau
Carolynn Leaman
Cora Lee-Palmer
John Lehman
Brian Lennie
Jim Leonhart
Olivier Leupin
Carrie Lewis
Howard Lewis
Sally Lewis
Michael Lewis
Jin Li
Lin Li
Jon Lindert
Jim Lindhorst
Scott Linssen
David Linz
Christopher Litzau
Mark Lloyd
Paul Lohmiller
Les Lovejoy
Michael Luba
Dan Ludwig
Jim Luedeke
Robert J. Lui
Martha Lunz
William Lynch
Alan Madry
Michael Maierle
Melissa Malott
Pat Marchese
Rocky Marcoux
Mike Marek
Janette Marsh
Joel Marshall
Fran Martin
Peter Martin
Affiliation
Wisconsin Lutheran College
Brown and Caldwell
City of Oak Creek

CDM
Celadon, LLC
Bonestroo
WBMDA
University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Milwaukee Waterworks
City of West Allis Engineering Dept.

University of Wisconsin - Milwakee, Civil Eng & Mechanics
Strand Associates, Inc.
City of St. Francis
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Wisconsin Entrepreneur Network
Milwaukee Community Service Corps
City of Mequon
Bonestroo
Village of Germantown
Wausau Concrete Company
Village of Caledonia
Preserve Our Parks
ARCADIS
Clean Wisconsin
Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises
Commissioner of City Development Milwaukee
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5
HNTB Corporation
Appendix 3A
Name
Michael Martin
Michelle Mason
Jerald Mast
Scott Mathie
Jeff Maxted
Peter McAvoy
Jeanne McCabe
Wendy McCalvy
Stephen McCarthy
John McCarthy
Gail McCarver
Gloria McCutcheon
Stephen McGowan
Margaret McGuire
Sandra McLellan
Gerard McMullen
Peter McMullen
James McNelly
Steve Mech
Richard Meeusen
G. Tracy Mehan
Hardy Meihsner
Mary Mertes
Joe Mestnick
Ezra Meyer
Tanya Meyer
Todd K. Michaels
William J. Mielke
Mark Mittag
Michael J. Mnichowicz
Robert Monnat
Todd Montgomery
Rob Montgomery
Jane Moore
Sarah Moore
William Moore
Rose Morgan
Kate Morgan
Michael Morgan
Ed Morse
Ron Romeis
James Muller
Kathy Mulvey
Lynn Muza
Emad Nadi
Affiliation
Village of Hales Corners
Carthage College
Metropolitan Builders Association
16th Street Community Health Center
Blood Research Institute
Graef, Anhalt, Schloemer, & Associates, Inc.
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
CSA Commercial
Badger Meter, Inc.
GeoDecisions
Clean Wisconsin
Village of Greendale
Ruekert Mielke, Inc.
CH2M-Hill
Mandel Group, Inc.
Friends of Lakeshore Nature Preserve
Montgomery Associates Resources Solutions, LLC
Greater Milwaukee Foundation
City of New Berlin
EMCS, Inc.
1000 Friends of Wisconsin
Wisconsin Rural Water Association
City of Franklin
S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.
Appendix 3A
Name
Dan Naze
James Ndon
Doug Neilson
Larry Neitzel
John Nelson
Dan Nelson, Jr.
Karen Nenahlo
Jeffrey S. Nettesheim
Justin New
Bob Newell
Gene Neyhart
Mark Nicolini
Peter Nilles
Gerald Novotny
Tom Nowakowski
Jennifer Oechsner
Lois O'Keefe
Jon Olander
Dale Olen
Brian Olson
Eyad Omari
Mike Oneby
Jill Organ
Kimberly Oriel Siemens
Jason Otto
Abbas Ourmazd
Aaron Owens
Mary Panzer
Chuck Pape
Mary Patzlaff
Eric Paulsen
Andy Pederson
Steve Percy
David Petering
Gerald Petersen
Mindy Petersen
Jane Peterson
Dan Piekarski
Nate Piotrowski
Ginny Plumeau
Todd Polacek
Jeff Polenske
Stephen Poloncsik
Ryan Porter
Lisa Quezada
Affiliation
VISIT Milwaukee
Visu-Sewer Clean & Seal, Inc
City of Milwaukee
JFNew
City of St. Francis
Milwaukee Community Sailing Center
City of Milwaukee
Mead & Hunt, Inc.
Office of Congresswoman Gwen Moore
Weston Solutions, Inc.
Sierra Club
Quad/Graphics, Inc.
MWH Americas
Milwaukee County
CDM
Village of Bayside
Director, UWM Center for Urban Initiatives & Research
Kettle Moraine Land Trust
Cedarburg Science
Applied Ecological Services, Inc.
City of Milwaukee
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5
Miller Brewing
Appendix 3A
Name
Ramsey Radakovich
Mike Raimonde
Tom Ratzki
Tina Reese
Dave Reid
Joel Reinders
Russ Reinsma
Tony Remsen
Gerard Rewolinski
Tim Rhode
Jon Richards
Mayor Al Richards
Ervin Riley
Robert Brunner
Susan Robertson
Diane Robertson
Christine Rodriguez
Len Roecker
Mark Rosolek
Perry Rossa
Debby Roszak
Rosalind Rouse
James Rowen
Carl Rowlands
Scott Royer
Patrick Ruel
Jennifer A. Runquist
Brian Russart
Mike Ruzicka
Rachel Sabre
Karen Sands
Carlos Santiago
Bill Sasse
Melissa Scanlon
Bonnie Schalow
Erick Schambarger
Karen Schapiro
Penny Scheueman
Kendra Schielke
John Schmid
Dean Schmidtke
Steve Schueller
Jon Schulman
Kristin Schultheis
Randy Schumacher

Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.
Black & Veatch, Inc.
Symbiont
UrbanMilwaukee.com
Affiliation
Super Steel Corporation

Village of Butler
State Representative
City of St. Francis
Super Steel Corporation
Commissioner
Village of Fox Point
Pier Wisconsin
Villages of Greendale and West Milwaukee
Mead & Hunt, Inc.
Milwaukee Waterworks
Consultant
TDI Associates
Veolia Water Milwaukee, LLC
League of Women Voters - Milwaukee County
Metropolitan Association of Realtors
Earth Tech
Village of Mount Pleasant
Midwest Environmental Advocates
Uihlein Foundation
City of Milwaukee
WE Energies
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.
Appendix 3A
Name
Eric Schumann
Heather Schwar
Michael Schwar
John Scripp
Tom Sear
Jane Segerdahl
Marsha Sehler
Kevin Shafer
Peter Shedivy
John Siepmann
Batya Silva
Tom Simasko
Darin Simpkins
David Simpson
David Simpson
Stephanie Sklba
Rick Smith
Guy Smith
Vacky Smucker
Rick Sokol
Sara Spence
Elizabeth Stager
Chris Stamborski
Mark Stamm
Gloria Stearns
Kris Stepenuck
Tom Still
Rudi Strickler
Michael Strigel
David L. Stroik
Andrew Struck
Duane Struemer
Bill Strutz
Sean Sullivan
Michael J. Sullivan
Jim Surfus
Chris Svoboda
Peter Swenson
Michael S. Switzenbaum
Benjamin Sykes
R.C. Tally
Julia Taylor
Lena Taylor
Tom Taylor
Audrey Templeton
Affiliation
HNTB Corporation
HNTB Corporation
Whyte, Hirschboeck, Dudek S.C.
Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc.
Uihlein/Wilson Architects
HNTB Corporation
Siepmann Realty Corporation
University of Wisconsin-Extension
US Fish and Wildlife Service
City of Brookfield
City of Muskego
Gateway Technical College
RA Smith & Associates
City of Greenfield
Representative Moores Office
The Nature Conservancy
UW- Madison; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Wisconsin Technology Council
Ozaukee County - Planning & Parks
Insinkerator
Ruekert & Mielke, Inc.
City of Oak Creek
Miller Brewing Company
Pier Milwaukee Yacht Storage
US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5
Foley & Lardner, LLP
Greater Milwaukee Com
City of Franklin
Miller Brewing Company
Appendix 3A
Name
Jim TeSelle
Sara Teske
Scott Thistle
Brian Thompson
Jeffrey Thornton
Tim Thur
Thomas Tollaksen
Angela Tornes
Steve Traudt
John Treffert
Dan Treloar
Kathy Trentadue
Casey Twanow
Mark Uecker
Michael Underwood
Stuart Utley
Kyle Vander Coer
Saji Villoth
Aina Vilumsons
Christopher Vitrano
Don Volkert
Yash Wadhwa
Thomas Wagner
Magdelene Wagner
J. P. Walker
Patrick Walsh
Liz Walsh
Rodney Walter
Brenna Wanous
Andrea Ward
Chuck Ward
Glen Warren
Sheldon Wasserman
William T. Wehrley
Joseph Weirich
JoAnn Weishan
David Weiss
Lyman Welch
Adrian Wencka
Sammis White
Yolanda White
Marc White
Rachel Wilberding
Kristen Wilhelm
Sara Wilson
Affiliation
Wisconsin Great Lakes Coalition
Brookstone Homes, Inc.
Tech Star
City of Milwaukee
Village of River Hills
National Park Service - Midwest Region
Tall Pines Conservancy
Kenosha County
Village of Greendale
Velocity Systems
City of South Milwaukee
Wisconsin Procurement Institute
Nelson Schmidt
Strand Associates, Inc.
Kapur & Associates, Inc.
City of Pewaukee
City of New Berlin
Milwaukee Economic Development Corporation
The Nature Conservancy
Biodiversity Project
State Representative
City of Wauwatosa
Argosy Foundation
Alliance for the Great Lakes
Riveredge Nature Center
City of Franklin
Mayes Wilson & Associates, LLC
Appendix 3A
Name
Dennis Winters
Christina Wistrom
Tom Wiza
Sarah Wright
Richard Yahr
Simon Yao
Zhi Biao Yin
Zafar Yousuf
Christine Zapf
Josh Zepnick
Corey Zetts
Kate Ziino
Robert Zimmerman
Brian Zimmerman
Tim Zimmerman
Richard Zinuticz
Dan Zitomer
Nancy Zolidis
Paul Zovic
Affiliation
Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development
City of Cedarburg
The Johnson Foundation
Sierra Club
Wisconsin State Assembly
Menomonee Valley Partners, Inc.
HNTB Corporation
Kohler Company
Montgomery Associates, Resources Solutions, LLC
Shaw Environmental
Appendix 3A
APPENDIX 3B
Name
Matt Aho
Ryan Amtmann
Mary Anderson
Martin Aquino
Richard Badger
Jessi Balcom
Brenda Bantz
Richard Barlosa
Tim Bate
Kathy Bates
Barbara Behlke
Bernadette Berdes
Gregory F. Bird
Paul Boersma
Curt Bolton
Todd Breiby
Katherine Brenner
Carrie Bristoll-Groll
Marsha Burzynski
Phil Bzdusek
Gary Casper
Theresa Caven
Jerome Chudzik
David Ciepluch
Chris Clayton
Kathy DeCarol
Troy Deibert
Gerald DeMers
Carol Diggelman
Steve Djur
Kae DonLevy
Mary Beth Driscoll
Greg Failey
Beth Fetterley
Sean Foltz
Ernst-Ulrich Franzen
Don Gallo
Sharon L. Gayan
Joan Giuliani
Kimberly Gleffe
Ben Gramling
Affiliation
Groundworks MKE
Ruekert/Mielke
City of Milwaukee
Wisconsin State Senator Taylor
Village of Elm Grove
MMSD
MATC
Behlke Consulting
MMSD
Black and Veatch
City of Greenfield
Wisconsin Coastal Management Program
W DNR
City of Brookfield
Graef Anhalt Schloemer & Associates, Inc
River Alliance
HNTB
Groundworks MKE
American Rivers
MKE Journal Sentinel
WI DNR
Miller-Coors Corp.
River Revitalization Fdn.
16th St. Community Health Center
Appendix 3B
PARTICIPANTS - KK
MO/DY/YR
[FILE NMNG
Lori Grant
Nancy Greifenhagen
Tom Grisa
David Grusznski
Dennis Grzezinski
Danelle Haake
John Hacker
Mike Hahn
Jessie Henderson
Nicole Hewitt
Mary Holleback
Andy Holschbach
Peter Hughes
Shermin Hughes
Nader Jaber
Steve Jacquart
Cindy Janusz
Jason Jentzsch
Jennifer Johanson
Tim John
Karen M. Johnson
Lauren Justus
Katrina Kazik
Steve Keith
Greg Kessler
Bruce Keyes
Terry Kinis
Ryan Kloth
Peg Kohring
Laura Kracum
Kevin Kratt
Bill Krill
Shirley Krug
Andrew Kunth
Michelle Lenski
Paul Lohmiller
Mike Maierle
Michael Maki
Doris Mattke
Peter McAvoy
John McCarthy
Judy Mead
River Alliance
City of Brookfield
MMSD
TN and Associates, Inc.
SEWRPC
Village of Butler/West Milwaukee
City of New Berlin
RiverEdge Nature Center
Ozaukee County
USGS
State Government
City of Milwaukee
MMSD
Engineering Solutions
Alverno College
Milwaukee County
City of New Berlin
Foley & Lardner
Conservation Fund
Tetra Tech
City of Milwaukee
River Revitalization Fdn.
MPS
City of Milwaukee
City of Wauwatosa
MPS
16 St. Community Health Center
Appendix 3B
PARTICIPANTS - KK
.]
Ezra Meyer
Peter Milles
Mark Mittag
Kate Morgan
Cheryl Nenn
Jeff Nettesheim
Bill Nimke
Lois O'Keefe
Gail Overholt
Harry Parrott
Ginny Plumeau
Lisa Quezada
Mike Raimonde
Russ Reinsma
Dawn Riegel
Perry Rossa
Jennifer Runquist
Brian Russart
Karen Sands
Karen Sands
Melissa Scanlan
Nick Schmal
Cathy Schwalbach
Tom Sear
Leslie Silletti
Laura Smith
Sean Sulllivan
Katie Swartz
Ben Sykes
Angie Tornes
J. Treffert
Stacey Tushaus
Saji Villoth
Marty Weigel
Nancy Welch
Terry Witkowski
Sarah Wright
Steven Wurster
Richard A. Yahr
Langley
Clean Wisconsin
CH2MHill
1000 Friends of Wisconsin
Milwaukee Riverkeeper
Inland Seas School of Expeditionary Learning
UWEX
Cedarburg Science
Miller-Coors Corp.
AECOM
Milwaukee County
MMSD
AECOM/Consultant Team
City of New Berlin
City of Milwaukee
Cedarburg Science
American Rivers
Foley and Lardner
National Park Service
City of Wauwatosa
City of Milwaukee
Johnson Foundation
Appendix 3B
PARTICIPANTS - KK
Kinnickinnic River
CHAPTER 4: CHARACTERIZE THE WATERSHED

4.0
4.1
Introduction
This chapter presents the results of an inventory and analysis of the surface waters and related
features of the Kinnickinnic River watershed. It includes descriptive information pertaining to
the historical trends and current status of habitat (physical, chemical, and biological) quality and
ecological integrity, bank stability, and potential limitations to water quality and fishery
resources. This chapter represents a refinement of the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional
Planning Commissions (SEWRPC) Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update
(RWQMPU) and includes fishery, macroinvertebrate, and habitat data gathered since the
completion of that plan up to the year 2009. In some cases, the habitat discussion focuses on the
watershed as a whole and does not discuss each element of habitat for each assessment point
area. The second half of the chapter presents water quality and pollutant loading within the
Kinnickinnic River watershed. In contrast to the habitat-based discussion, the water quality and
pollutant loading data and modeling results are organized by each assessment point area.
As mentioned in Chapter 3 of this Watershed Restoration Plan (WRP), the RWQMPU was the
starting point and set the framework for this plan it is not intended to be the final level of
restoration for the watershed. The goals of the RWQMPU, and consequently the WRP, were not
set to meet water quality standards in all locations of the watershed 365 days per year.
Therefore, the water quality results shown in this chapter, which are based on the recommended
plan from the RWQMPU, do not all meet water quality standards. However, achieving the goals
will significantly reduce the annual pollutant loads and concentrations in the streams and
improve habitat in the watershed. It is anticipated that additional work will follow as the
adaptive watershed management approach is implemented that will continue to improve water
quality.
4.2
Overview of Habitat Conditions within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed
Note: Sections 4.2 and 4.3 consist of excerpts from SEWRPCs Memorandum Report 194
Stream Habitat Conditions and Biological Assessment of the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River
Watersheds: 2000 2009. In some cases, SEWRPCs material has been modified or rearranged
to highlight pertinent aspects of the Kinnickinnic River watershed and to fit within the context of
this WRP. Memorandum Report 194 is included in Appendix 4A.
Background
Water from rainfall and snowmelt flows into stream systems by one of two pathways: either
directly flowing overland as surface water runoff into streams or infiltrating into the soil surface
and eventually flowing underground into streams as groundwater. Ephemeral streams generally
flow only during the wet season or large rainfall events. Streams that flow year-round are called
perennial streams and are primarily sustained by groundwater during dry periods. The surface
water drainage system contains 31 miles of perennial and ephemeral streams within the
Kinnickinnic River watershed (Figure 4-1). This map also depicts the assessment point areas,
identified as KK-1 thru KK-11. As noted above, some of the habitat-based characteristics and
the water quality and pollutant loading discussions utilize assessment point areas to focus the
discussion. Between the discussion of habitat and water quality/pollutant loading, note that there
are minor differences in aerial coverage of several of the downstream assessment point areas.
4-1
Kinnickinnic River
Figure 4-1 corresponds to the Kinnickinnic Rivers habitat-based discussion. Figure 4-7,
presented later in this chapter, corresponds to the water quality/ pollutant loading discussion.
Viewed from above, the network of water channels that form a river system typically displays a
branchlike pattern. A stream channel that flows into a larger channel is called a tributary of that
channel. The entire area drained by a single river system is termed a drainage basin, or
watershed. Stream size increases downstream as more and more tributary segments enter the
main channel. As water travels from headwater streams toward the mouth of larger rivers,
streams gradually increase their width and depth and the amount of water they discharge.
4-2
Source: SEWRPC, modified from Memorandum Report No. 194.
FIGURE 4-1
HABITAT ASSESSMENT POINT AREAS
WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER
WATERSHED
KK WATERSHED RESTORATION PLAN
Kinnickinnic River
To better understand the Kinnickinnic River watershed and the factors that shape its stream
conditions, it is important to understand the effects of both spatial and temporal scales.
Microhabitats, such as a handful-sized patch of gravel, are most susceptible to disturbance while
river systems and watersheds, or drainage basins, are least susceptible. However, large
disturbances can directly influence smaller-scale features of streams. Similarly, on a temporal
scale, siltation of microhabitats may disturb the biotic community over the short term. However,
if the disturbance is of limited scope and intensity, the system may recover quickly to predisturbance levels.1 In contrast, extensive or prolonged disturbances, such as stream
channelization and the construction of concrete-linings, have resulted in longer term impacts
throughout the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
Historical conditions
Early records reveal that the Milwaukee Estuary area including the Kinnickinnic River has been
substantially channelized, relocated, dredged, filled, and dammed to convert the significant
wetland complex into the highly constructed navigable port that currently exists.2 This
conversion allowed for the development and growth of the greater Milwaukee metropolitan area
that currently exists, but this conversion has lead to significant environmental degradation in
water quality, fisheries, and wildlife habitat.3 Further comparison of the earliest known survey
of the entire Kinnickinnic River system, completed in 1836, to the present channel conditions in
2005 also shows evidence of significant channelization, channel lining, and diversion of stream
channels over this time period.
Straightening meandering stream channels or channelization was once a widely used and
accepted technique to reduce flooding. The objectives of channelization were to reduce floods
by conveying stormwater runoff more rapidly and to facilitate drainage of low-lying lands.
Channelization can lead to increased water temperature due to the loss of riparian vegetation. It
can also alter in-stream sedimentation rates and paths of sediment erosion, transport, and
deposition. Therefore, channelization activities, as traditionally accomplished without mitigating
features, generally lead to a diminished suitability of in-stream and riparian habitat for fish and
wildlife.
Flood minimization measures also involved the placement of concrete (both as a flow channel
enhancement and as flow controls as in the case of dams, drop structures, and enclosed channel)
and removal of vegetation from channels to promote rate of flow. Historically, these measures
were implemented without consideration of habitat impacts. Concrete-lined stream segments are
particularly damaging, due to the creation of conditions that fragment and limit linear and lateral
connectivity with the stream and their corridor habitat and ecosystem; limit or prevent fish and
wildlife movement; increase water temperature; destroy fish, aquatic life and wildlife habitat;
limit recreational use including those attendant to navigation, fishing, and aesthetics; and may
actually increase flooding and decrease public safety. See Appendix 4A for SEWRPCs
Memorandum Report No. 194: Stream Habitat Conditions and Biological Assessment of the
G.J. Niemi and others, An Overview of Case Studies on Recovery of Aquatic Systems From Disturbance,
Journal of Environmental Management (Volume 14, pages 571-587, 1990)
2
Poff, R. and C. Threinen, Surface Water Resources of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Conservation Department,
Madison, Wisconsin (1964)
3
Milwaukee River Estuary Area of Concern (AOC), http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/milwaukee.html#pagetop
4-4
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River Watersheds: 2000 - 2009. This memo provides additional
information and detailed mapping of the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
Land use, imperviousness, and hydrology
The Kinnickinnic River watershed is nearly entirely built out. While such urbanization in the
absence of planning can create negative impacts on streams, urbanization itself is not the main
factor driving the degradation of the Kinnickinnic River watershed. In general, streams can
survive and flourish in urban settings. The main factors leading to the degradation of urban
waterbodies are the following:
Creation of large areas of connected impervious surfaces
Lack of adequate stormwater management facilities to control the quantity and quality of
runoff
Proximity of development to waterbodies
Loss of natural areas
Inadequate construction erosion controls.
These factors increase the potential for the occurrence of the negative water quality/quantity
effects associated with urbanization. Industrial and commercial land uses have significantly
more impervious area than residential land uses. Furthermore, smaller residential lots create
more impervious surfaces than larger residential lots. TABLE 4-1 lists the approximate amount
of impervious surfaces created by residential, industrial, commercial, and governmental and
institutional development.
4-5
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-1
APPROXIMATE PERCENTAGE OF CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS

SURFACES CREATED BY URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Type of Urban Development
Impervious Surface*
(percent)
Two-Acre Residential
10-15
One-Acre Residential
15-25
One-Half-Acre Residential
20-30
One-Third-Acre Residential
25-35
One-Fourth-Acre Residential
35-45
One-Eighth-Acre Residential
60-70
Industrial
70-80
Commercial
85-95
*Higher percentages of impervious surface increases the potential for negative

water quality/quantity effects
Although commercial and industrial developments are characterized by a larger percentage of

impervious surfaces, residential developments (including lawns) present different concerns.
Lawns are considered pervious, but they do show some similarities to impervious surfaces.
When lawns are compared to woodlands and cropland, they are found to contain less soil pore
space (up to 15% less than cropland and 24% less than woodland) available for the infiltration of
water. In many instances, the porosity of residential lawns is impacted by considerable soil
compaction that normally occurs during grading activities. Native grasses, forbs, and sedges
have deeper root systems than turf grass. The deep roots loosen the soil and create flow channels
that increase infiltration capacity. Also, owing to excessive applications of fertilizers and
pesticides, urban lawns typically produce higher unit loads of nutrients and pesticide than those
produced by cropland.4
When a new commercial or residential development is built near a stream, the extent of
driveways, rooftops, sidewalks, and lawns increases while native plants and undisturbed soils
decrease, and the ability of the shoreland area to perform its natural functions (flood control,
pollutant removal, wildlife habitat, and aesthetic beauty) is decreased. In the absence of mitigating measures, urbanization impacts the watershed, not only by altering the ratio between
stormwater runoff and groundwater recharge, but also through the changing of stream hydrology.
In general, increased imperviousness leads to greater runoff volumes and peak flows; this is
referred to as flashiness (or the rate at which flow responds to a precipitation event) (Figure
4-2). These changes further influence other characteristics of the stream, such as channel
morphology, water quality/quantity, and biological diversity.
Center for Watershed Protection, Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Systems, Watershed Protection
Research Monograph No.1, March 2003, p. 7
4-6
Note: The discharge curve is higher and steeper for urban streams
The words before and after refer to before and after urbanization
Source: SEWRPC Memorandum Report No. 194.
FIGURE 4-2
HYDROGRAPH COMPARISON URBAN
AND RURAL STREAMS
Kinnickinnic River
In addition, because impervious cover prevents rainfall from infiltrating into the soil, less flow is
available to recharge ground water. Therefore, during extended periods without rainfall,
baseflow levels are often reduced in urban streams.5 This has been observed in the Kinnickinnic
River watershed, which limits recreational opportunities such as canoeing. In addition to water
quantity and stream hydrology, stormwater runoff traveling over a parking lot or driveway will
pick up more heavy metals, bacteria, pathogens, and other stream pollutants than runoff traveling
over surfaces that allow some of the stormwater to be filtered or to infiltrate. This directly
affects water quality and pollutant loading within the Kinnickinnic River watershed, discussed
on page 4-22.
Biological
Habitat is comprised of a complicated mixture of biological, physical, chemical, and
hydrological variables. Biotic interactions such as predation and competition can affect species
abundance and distributions within aquatic systems; however, such interactions are beyond the
scope of this report and are not considered further in this document. Abiotic factors such as
stream flow, channelization, fragmentation of stream reaches, temperature, dissolved oxygen
concentrations, substrates, among others are strong determinants of aquatic communities (fishes,
invertebrates, algae). Therefore, biological community quality is a surrogate for habitat quality.
For example, high abundance and diversity of fishes is strongly associated with high quality
habitat. It is important to note that habitat quality is intimately related to land use within a
watershed as well as to land use directly adjacent to the stream bank. Consequently, watershed
size and associated land use characterization as well as riparian buffer width are critical elements
necessary in defining habitat quality.
4.3
Habitat Assessment within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed
This section highlights habitat information for key assessment point areas within the
Kinnickinnic River watershed based upon the analysis of physical and biological conditions from
data obtained from years 2000 through 2009. This assessment was based upon fish,
macroinvertebrate, and habitat samples collected for a variety of purposes by multiple agencies.
These samples were collected for a variety of purposes and programs. However, it is important
to note that the collection methods used were similar and comparable for purposes of this report.
Physical and riparian
The Kinnickinnic River system is comprised of about 30% concrete-lining and 30% enclosed
channel, and most of the remaining open stream channel is unstable and eroding (TABLE 4-2).
A 2004 stream assessment report indicated that the upper unchannelized sections of the
Kinnickinnic River are severely incised (downcut or eroded streambed) and laterally unstable.
Comparison of historical longitudinal profiles indicates that up to 4 to 5 feet of incision has
occurred since the 1970s.6 This channel instability is due to a combination of elements that
include: a high amount of urban development and associated impervious area, stormwater
network designed to move runoff quickly and efficiently off the land surface; significant
encroachment of urban development to the stream, which confines flows within a narrow area
5
Simmons, D., and R. Reynolds, Effects of urbanization on baseflow of selected south shore streams, Long Island,
NY, Water Resources Bulletin, (Volume 18(5): 797-805, 1982)
6
Milwaukee County, Milwaukee County Stream Assessment, Final Report, completed by Inter-Fluve, Inc.,
(September, 2004)
4-8
Kinnickinnic River
and exposing the streambank and streambed to extremely high velocities and shear stress; and
steep slopes.
This is consistent with extensive areas within the Kinnickinnic River watershed with riparian
buffers less than 75 feet in width. More than 70% of the river corridors within the Kinnickinnic
River watershed contain buffers with less than 75 feet in width. Stream widths in the
Kinnickinnic River generally range from 10 to 74 feet. The Upper and Middle Kinnickinnic
river mainstem assessment point areas (KK-3, KK-10) contain the most highly buffered stream
reaches. Approximately 27% of the stream within assessment point area KK-3 and 23% of the
stream in assessment point area KK-10 has riparian buffers that exceed 75 feet in width.
Channel bed substrates throughout the Kinnickinnic River watershed were dominated by gravels
and coarse sands. These large substrate sizes are consistent with high velocity flows that occur
throughout this watershed. However, not much instream physical information exists within this
watershed.
The highly buffered areas within the watershed tend to be associated with park systems. The
Upper Kinnickinnic River mainstem also contains two of the six total highest quality vegetation
communities in the entire watershed. The Lower Wilson Park Creek (KK-8), Holmes Avenue
Creek (KK-5), and Lyons Park Creek (KK-1) assessment point areas also contain important plant
community areas with fair to good quality. These areas serve as extremely important wildlife
refuge areas within the Kinnickinnic River watersheds highly urbanized landscape. See
Appendix 4A for SEWRPCs Memorandum Report No. 194: Stream Habitat Conditions and
Biological Assessment of the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River Watersheds: 2000 - 2009. This
memo provides additional information on buffer widths and plant communites including detailed
mapping of these features within the Kinnickinnic River watershed. For more information on
natural areas within the Kinnickinnic River watershed, see the following reports:
A Regional Natural Areas and Critical Species Habitat Protection and Management Plan
for Southeastern Wisconsin7
A Greenway Connection Plan for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District8
A Park and Open Space Plan for Milwaukee County9
Conservation Plan Technical Report10
As previously summarized within the RWQMPU, there are a total of 61 point sources identified
within the Kinnickinnic River watershed that include noncontact cooling water permits,
individual permits, CSO outfalls, and SSO outfalls. These are predominantly located within the
assessment point areas that correspond to the Kinnckinnic River mainstem (KK-3, KK-10, and
KK-11). There are an estimated 53 stormwater outfalls found along the Kinnickinnic River. The
stormwater outfalls are not concentrated in any particular area, but are found throughout the
watershed. Stormwater outfalls are far more numerous than any other type of outfall.
Considering their distribution and the fact that these stormwater outfalls discharge with all rain
7
SEWRPC, A Regional Natural Areas and Critical Species Habitat Protection and Management Plan for
Southeastern Wisconsin, Planning Report No. 42 (September 1997)
8
SEWRPC, A Greenway Connection Plan for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Memorandum Report
No. 152 (December 2002)
9
SEWRPC, A Park and Open Space Plan for Milwaukee County, Community Assistance Planning Report No. 132
(November 1991)
10
MMSD, Conservation Plan Technical Report (October 2001)
4-9
Kinnickinnic River
events (as opposed to a few events a year like CSOs), their potential for water quality impacts is
far more significant.
The physical outfall pipes themselves can potentially create significant localized erosion to
streambed and/or banks, especially if they are constructed at poor angles. These outfalls can be
retrofitted by changing pipe angles, installing deflectors, or shortening pipes, among others. It is
also important to note that these outfalls may provide opportunities for innovative infiltration
practices as well as protecting streambed and streambanks from erosion. In addition to outfall
design and construction, the location of the outfall is an important consideration. An outfall that
discharges directly to a waterbody conveys stormwater past the riparian buffer. These conditions
preclude any opportunity for the riparian buffer to filter or treat stormwater. Ideally, outfalls
would discharge directly into the riparian buffer area which would allow some infiltration and
filtration of the stormwater within the buffer area. Outfall pipes can be retrofit or daylighted to
shift the outfall discharge point to the riparian buffer; note that the riparian buffer may need to be
modified in the new discharge area to prevent erosion. Due to limited numbers of examples of
infiltration and streambank protections projects withn the Kinnickinnic River watershed, Figure
4-3 depicts projects that are underway within the Menomonee River watershed. Also, see
Appendix 4A for SEWRPCs Memorandum Report No. 194: Stream Habitat Conditions and
Biological Assessment of the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River Watersheds: 2000 - 2009. This
memo provides additional information on outfall pipes, point sources and monitoring sites
including detailed mapping of these features of the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
4-10
TABLE 4-2, Page 1 of 2

PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL
CONDITIONS
[]
TABLE 4-2, Page 2 of 2

PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL
CONDITIONS
[]
2utfall located
within riparian buffer
Rocklined area downstream
of outfall to increase infiltration
and reduce erosion
9HJHWDWHG area to
increase infiltration
Reconnected floodplain /
([SDQGHG riparian buffer
Erosion control fabric

2utfall located
within riparian buffer
Natural stone
streambank
Underwood Creek Stream Restoration Project

Source: SEWRPC, modified from Memorandum Report No.194.
FIGURE 4-3
INFILTRATION AND STREAMBANK
PROTECTION
Kinnickinnic River
Instream biological conditions

The most recent biological assessment of the Kinnickinnic River watershed identified a strong
relationship between water and aquatic community quality and amount of urban land use.11 For
example, median chloride concentrations among greater Milwaukee watersheds show a positive
relation with increasing land use. However, it is important to note that not all water quality
constituents showed the same pattern in its relationship with urban lands; some showed opposite
responses and some showed no patterns at all. However, aggregated biological indices generally
present a pretty clear relationship between urban environments and habitat. Figure 4-4 shows the
strong negative relationship between fisheries Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) and Hilsenhoff
Biotic Integrity (HBI) quality with increased levels of urbanization within the greater Milwaukee
watersheds.12
Hydrology plays an important role. As noted above, urbanization increases impervious surfaces,
which can lead to an increase in flashiness, which subsequently affects streambank stability,
streambed stability, pollutant loading, and sediment dynamics. These changes can affect habitat
availability and quality. The Kinnickinnic River contains about 30 to 40% imperviousness based
upon the amount of urban land development. In summary, the hydrology within the
Kinnickinnic River watershed is a major determinant of stream dynamics and is a vital
component of habitat for fishes and other organisms. The interactions among land use, stream
characteristics, and habitat are diagramed in Figure 4-5.
TABLE 4-3 presents aggregated bioassessment results from multiple watersheds from the
Milwaukee area. Data from other watersheds were used to put the results of the Kinnickinnic
River into context. This table really highlights the fact that the highest quality aquatic habitats
tend to be located in less developed areas. In contrast, the poorest quality biological
communities are located in highly urbanized areas, including the Kinnickinnic River. While
urbanization is not the only determinant of habitat quality, it does tend to play a prominent role
and serve as a predictor of habitat degradation. In general, SEWRPCs RWQMPU summarized
that the biological community in the Kinnickinnic River watershed is limited primarily due to the
following:
1) Periodic stormwater pollutant loads (associated with increased flashiness)
2) Decreased base flows and increased water temperatures due to urbanization
3) Habitat loss and continued fragmentation due to culverts, concrete lined channels,
enclosed conduits, drop structures, and past channelization
11
J.C. Thomas , M.A. Lutz, and others, Water Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites Within the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, February 2004-September 2005, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific
Investigations Report 2007-5084 (2007)
12
The USEPA indicates that IBI is used in warm freshwater streams to evaluate fish species richness and
composition, number and abundance of indicator species, trophic organization and function, reproductive behavior,
fish abundance, and condition of individual fish. [Internet]; available from http://www.epa.gov/bioiweb1/html/ibihist.html.
4-14
FIGURE 4-4
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BIOTA

AND URBANIZATION
FIGURE 4-5
INTERACTIONS OF LAND USE, STREAM
CHARACTERISTICS AND HABITAT
TABLE 4-3
AGGREGATED BIOASSESSMENT
RESULTS
.]
Kinnickinnic River
Urban land uses tend to increase impervious surfaces which affect stream hydrology and impact
water quality. Periodic stormwater pollutant loads result in significant pollutant loading to area
waterbodies. Most of the water quality impacts are associated with the first flush of rainfall or
snowmelt events (wet weather event). The first flush carries most of the pollutants that have
accumulated on impervious surfaces since the preceding wet weather event. Following the first
flush, subsequent runoff is referred to as extended runoff; this runoff tends to transport less
pollution. In general, the first flush occurs during the first 30 minutes of a wet weather event and
the rest of the wet weather event produces extended runoff. Recent analyses compared the
concentrations of total phosphorus (TP) and total suspended solids (TSS) among the following
sources:
First flush stormwater
CSO
SSO
Extended runoff
The analysis included water quality data that was gathered from 1990 to 2003, so it included
both pre-tunnel and post-tunnel data. The analysis of TP within first flush stormwater indicates
that TP concentrations are comparable to those found in CSOs, but tend to present in lower
concentrations relative to SSOs. The concentration of TP within extended runoff is generally
lower than those within the CSO and the first flush. The analysis of TSS within first flush
stormwater indicates that TSS concentrations are generally higher than TSS concentrations found
in CSOs, SSOs, and extended runoff. These analyses indicate that nonpoint source pollution
from the first flush of wet weather events contribute to TP and TSS loads and impact water
quality.
Chlorides from deicing activities also affect water quality. Similarly to TP and TSS, chlorides are
transported to area waterbodies during the first flush of wet weather events. This is demonstrated
with recent water quality monitoring and analysis in the Menomonee River watershed. Chloride
concentrations in the Menomonee River (at 70th Street) are correlated with winter and wet
weather events. As expected, the measured chloride concentrations tend to be highest during the
winter months when salt is applied to roadways within the Menomonee River watershed. Similar
relationships among season, wet weather and in-stream chloride concentrations are expected
within the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
With respect to item 3 on page 4-14 (habitat loss and fragmentation due to structures and
concrete linings), Figure 4-6 depicts an example of a concrete-lined channel (top) that was
recently restored along with its associated floodplain (bottom). While this reach is not located in
the Kinnickinnic River watershed, it serves as a good example of the potential habitat
improvement that can be realized by concrete removal and floodplain restoration.
4-18
Straight channel
Concrete lining
Re-connected
floodplain
Erosion control
fabric
Natural meandering
channel
Stabilized bank
Large boulders
provide resting
areas and slope
stability
Gravel substrate
FIGURE 4-6
CONCRETE REMOVAL / FLOODPLAIN
RESTORATION EXAMPLE
Kinnickinnic River
Channel obstructions and fragmentation

There are nearly 100 potential channel obstructions within the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
These structures are primarily associated with road and railway crossings in the form of culverts
and bridges, but obstructions can also include concrete lined channels, drop structures, and debris
jams, among others. These obstructions can form physical and/or hydrological barriers to
fisheries movements, which can severely limit the abundance and diversity of fishes within
stream systems.13 In addition to some of the road and rail stream crossings, the concrete lining
within the Lower Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10) limits fish
passage due to its extreme length, lack of habitat, lack of adequate water depths, high velocities,
and flashiness.
As summarized by SEWRPCs RWQMPU, there has been an apparent loss of multiple fish
species throughout the Kinnickinnic River watershed over the last 100 years. However, it is
important to note that this loss of species has been disproportionately greater among reaches that
are farther away from a connection with Lake Michigan (TABLE 4-4). This indicates that the
poor habitat, hydrology, and water quality conditions continue to severely limit fisheries within
this watershed. In general, the Kinnickinnic River contains the poorest fish, invertebrate, and
algal communities within the greater Milwaukee watersheds. In fact, only two native fish
species have been found within this watershed since the year 2000. However, due to its
connection with the estuary and Great Lakes system, the lower reach of the Kinnickinnic River
mainstem has the greatest potential for fishery improvement. This information combined with
recent removal of contaminated sediments within the lower reaches of the Kinnickinnic River
makes it much more likely that fish species utilization will increase within this lower part of the
system.
Existing water quality monitoring information
The Kinnickinnic River watershed has a total of 26 surface water monitoring stations. The
majority of the water quality data are being collected by the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage
District (MMSD), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR), and volunteers affiliated with the Milwaukee Riverkeepers Citizen Based Monitoring
program. The MMSD continues to conduct bi-monthly physical and chemical sampling and
analysis at six mainstem and two tributary sites on the Kinnickinnic River, including inorganic,
organic, bacteriological, and instantaneous water quality measurements. The MMSD also
contributes funds for the operation of flow gaging stations by the USGS on the Kinnickinnic
River and some of its associated tributaries.
13
T.M. Slawski, and others, Effects of low-head dams, urbanization, and tributary spatial position on fish
assemblage structure within a Midwest stream, North American Journal of Fisheries Management (2008)
4-20
TABLE 4-4
FISH SPECIES COMPOSITION
Kinnickinnic River
The MMSD with USGS have also established one real-time water quality monitoring station on
the mainstem of the Kinnickinnic River. Using remote sensor technology, the MMSD and
USGS are measuring real-time physical water quality and estimating other real-time
concentrations of selected water quality constituents. Real-time sensors at each location are
measuring specific conductance, water temperature, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity along with
stream flow and stage. The real-time sensors are connected to data-collection platforms that
transmit data in parallel to the MMSD and USGS public websites. Access to this information on
a real-time basis allows for water resources management decisions and provides information for
citizens.
4.4
Water Quality and Pollutant Loading within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed
As noted at the beginning of the habitat assessment section, an assessment point area has been
developed for the Kinnickinnic River watershed. In most cases, the Kinnickinnic River
watershed assessment point areas match, but there are minor differences in the vicinity of the
estuary. With respect to water quality and pollutant loading, these assessment point areas are the
land areas that the water quality model uses to calculate the delivered pollutant loads. Each
assessment point areas water quality is the result of the upstream water quality and a function of
the delivered loads from the assessment point area, accounting for the effects of instream
processes through the water quality model.
Within the following section, for each assessment point area, the following are presented:
A map of the assessment point area showing the extent of the area (Figure 4-7)
Land use in the assessment point area
Civil divisions (municipalities) within in the assessment point area
Baseline Pollutant Loading and Water Quality with Baseline defined as:
o
o
o
The simulated water quality resulting from the model that has been validated
considering actual water quality data through calendar year 2007
Land use as of 2000
Land use pollutant loading rates that were initially based on the source loading
and management model (SLAMM) and soil and water assessment tool (SWAT)
models with some adjustments made to calibrate the water quality model
To support the development of this watershed restoration plan (WRP), the water quality models
were updated to run through December 2007. The purpose of the update was to account for
known changes in the watersheds and to ensure the models still adequately represent Baseline
conditions. The updated modeling results for the Kinnickinnic River watershed were found to
accurately simulate observed flow and water quality conditions. The Water Quality Model
Refinement memo is included in Appendix 4B.
Detailed Fact Sheets are located in Appendix 4C. The fact sheets use data, maps, figures, and
tables to present a comprehensive picture of the Baseline conditions within each assessment
point area in the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
The pollutant loading is presented by nonpoint sources and point sources (industrial
discharges, combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs).
The loading for nonpoint sources is further refined to estimate the delivered loads by
4-22
Kinnickinnic River
land use (expressed as loads and as percent of total loads) and the unit loads for each
land use (loads expressed as units per acre per year).
Year 2020 Pollutant Loading and Water Quality with Year 2020 defined as the
water quality resulting from the model assuming the following:
o
Growth in the assessment point areas as projected in the SEWRPC RWQMPU for
Year 2020.
Complete implementation of the RWQMPUs recommended actions for the

Recommended Plan, which includes full implementation of Wis. Admin. Code
Natural Resources (NR) 151 Runoff Management and implementation of many
other actions as detailed in the RWQMPU. See Chapter 6 for a list and brief
description of RWQMPU recommendations that are included in this WRP. For
more detail and information, see Chapter X of the RWQMPU.
Water quality modeling results based upon these assumptions.
The pollutant loading is presented by nonpoint sources and point sources

(industrial discharges, CSOs, and SSOs). The loading for nonpoint sources is
further refined to estimate the delivered loads by land use (expressed as loads and
as percent of total loads) and the unit loads for each land use (loads expressed as
units per acre per year).
While the chapter presents data for each of the assessment point areas individually, it may be
useful to first provide a comparison among all assessment point areas within the Kinnickinnic
River Watershed. TABLE 4-5 presents a summary of loads derived from modeled nonpoint and
point sources. The nonpoint and point loads represent the Baseline modeled water quality in
units per year. In addition, the ranked loads for the Kinnickinnic River watershed assessment
point areas and graphs that present the unit loads per acre for the assessment point areas are
presented in Appendix 4D. The data and analysis included in these appendices can serve as tools
during the implementation of actions that are intended to address focus areas in the Kinnickinnic
River watershed.
4-23
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-5
TOTAL BASELINE ASSESSMENT POINT AREAS LOADS
TP
Baseline Nonpoint
2
3
TSS
BOD
Baseline Point
TSS
BOD
Baseline Total
TSS
BOD
FC
TP
FC
TP
pounds
tons
pounds
billion counts
pounds
tons
pounds
billion counts
pounds
tons
pounds
billion counts
625
894
1,204
1,846
1,006
599
444
1,727
541
141.94
278.92
280.35
441.90
321.75
157.12
108.49
444.27
128.21
16,935
30,856
33,547
122,152
44,480
16,752
12,119
49,047
15,349
247,097
327,952
469,449
458,079
361,867
202,881
145,036
583,597
185,811
0
458
1
335
442
0
0
0
1,155
0.01
1.59
0.03
3.57
0.40
0
0
0
28.00
7
5,451
13
5,838
1,124
0
0
0
13,951
517
2,068
1,034
16,143
0
0
0
0
1,021,327
626
1,352
1,205
2,181
1,448
599
444
1,727
1,696
141.95
280.51
280.38
445.47
322.15
157.12
108.49
444.27
156.21
16,942
36,307
33,560
127,990
45,604
16,752
12,119
49,047
29,300
247,614
330,020
470,483
474,222
361,867
202,881
145,036
583,597
1,207,138
KK-10
1,065
293.19
31,886
Notes:
1
TP = Total phosphorus
2
TSS = Total suspended solids
3
BOD = Biochemical oxygen demand
4
FC = Fecal coliform
376,749
434
19.62
8,968
491,755
1,499
312.81
40,854
868,504
KK-1
KK-2
KK-3
KK-4
KK-5
KK-6
KK-7
KK-8
KK-9
4-24
FC

4.5
Kinnickinnic River
Assessment Point Areas (Subwatersheds)
The Kinnickinnic River contains 10 assessment point areas. These areas are presented on Figure
4-7.
4.5.1
Lyons Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-1)
Lyons Park Creek is located in the northwestern portion of the Kinnickinnic River watershed,
primarily within the city of Milwaukee. This tributary flows in a northerly direction within
enclosed conduit, concrete-lined channel, and natural channel conditions.
The creek begins about mile southeast of the intersection of Forest Home and Morgan
Avenues. From that point, the creek flows northwesterly and enters enclosed conduit and flows
beneath Forest Home Avenue. After emerging about 100 feet north of Forest Home Avenue, the
creek flows northwesterly through Lyons Park. This reach flows within a predominantly natural
channel that terminates at 57th Street. West of 57th Street, the creek flows northwesterly within a
concrete-lined channel to West Lakefield Drive, located about a block south of West Oklahoma
Avenue and east of 60th Street. From this point, the creek then enters enclosed conduit and flows
northerly under Oklahoma Avenue and emerges at West Bennett Avenue. From that point, the
creek enters a concrete-lined channel and continues to flow northerly past Fairview Elementary
School and the Milwaukee Spanish Immersion School. When the creek reaches Cleveland
Avenue, it again enters enclosed conduit. The creek re-emerges about 200 feet north of
Cleveland Avenue, flows through a short section of concrete-lined channel, and then enters the
Kinnickinnic River Parkway. At this point, the creek enters the South 43rd Street Ditch
assessment point area (KK-2), see page 4-41. For more information on Lyons Park Creek or
other subwatersheds within the Kinnickinnic River, see SEWRPCs RWQMPU.
There are approximately 10 dams or drop structures located along Lyons Park Creek. The width
of the riparian margin is relatively narrow, with only 10% of the stream within the assessment
point area having a riparian width that exceeds 75 feet. The creek predominantly flows through
high-density residential neighborhoods and two commercial areas associated with Forest Home
and Oklahoma Avenues. The Lyons Park Creek assessment point (KK-1) area encompasses 1.3
square miles (Figure 4-8).
Beyond the land use adjacent to the creek, the land use within the Lyons Park Creek assessment
point area (KK-1) is predominantly high-density residential (54%) and low-density residential
(5%) (these are defined in the following table). Local roads and arterial streets contribute to
transportation, which makes up approximately 30% of the total land use. Recreation, natural
areas, and open space along with institutional, governmental, and commercial land uses compose
the remaining 11%. Based on an analysis of land use information used to develop the water
quality data, approximately 31% of the area is impervious. More information pertaining to land
use and the effects of imperviousness on water quality and flows are available in the RWQMPU.
TABLE 4-6 presents the land uses within the Lyons Park Creek assessment point area (KK-1).
4-25
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-6
LAND USE IN THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1)
Land Use Included in
Assessment Point Area (sq mi)
Percent of Land Use within

Assessment Point Area
0.0
0.00%
0.1
4.72%
0.7
54.19%
Commercial
0.0
1.93%
Institutional & Governmental
0.0
4.08%
Outdoor Recreation, Wetlands,

Woodlands, and Open Space
0.1
5.05%
Transportation
0.4
30.03%
Manufacturing and Industrial
0.0
0.00%
Total
1.3
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Low Density Residential
High Density Residential
Notes:
1
Low density residential includes suburban, low, and medium density single-family residential areas (fewer than 6.9 dwelling
units / net residential acre).
2
High density residential includes high density single family residential (greater than 7.0 dwelling units / net residential acre)
along with two-family, multi-family, mobile homes and residential land under development.
4-26
94
59
59
181
59
Na tio
100
Village of
WEST MILWAU KEE
A ve
nal
794
Bur nha m St
894
Bur nha m St
it
lo
Be
e
om
ve
38
13 th St
KK-2
e
Av
27 th St
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
W
WE
ES
S TT A
A LL LL II S
S
35 th St
45
20 th St
Fo
st
re
Linc oln Av e
43 rd St
60 th St
Linc oln Av e
24
Cle ve la nd A ve
Cle ve la nd A ve
60 th St
KK-10
KK-9
KK-3
Oklahom a A ve
Cle me nt A ve
ve
Cha se A ve
6th St
e
om
13 th St
20 th St
t
es
43 rd St
r
Fo
27 th St
Oklahom a A ve
35 th St
62
32
Morga n A ve
KINNICKI NNI C RIVE R
Morga n A ve
KK-1
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
S
S TT .. FF R
RA
AN
NC
C II S
S
241
Howa rd Av e
894
KK-8
KK-7
36
45
Boliva r Av e
43
94
38
100
894
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
D
E LL D
G
N FF II E
EN
EE
RE
GR
KK-6
Y
Howe ll Av e
43
La y ton A ve
62
Penns ylv annia A ve
6th St
13 th St
20 th St
35 th St
24
27 th St
Y
N
La y ton A ve
Edger ton A ve
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
C
CU
UD
DA
AH
HY
Y
KK-4
KK-5
32
Gra nge Av e
Gra nge Av e
Village of
HALES CORNERS
119
Village of
GREENDALE
62
ZZ
ZZ
32
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Combined Sewer Service Area
)LJXUH7
KK Watershed
$VVHVVPHQW3RLQWArea
Water
Routing Reach Tributary Area
Watershed
Waterbodies
1,200 2,400
Civil Division
Feet
4,800
WATERSHED RESTORATION PLAN

KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHE'
Cleve land Ave
KK-1
r
Fo
t
es
e
Av
60th St
43rd St
Oklahoma Ave
m
Ho
Morga n Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Outdoor Recreation, Wetland, and Woodland, Open Lands
Transportation, Communication, and Utilities
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Institutional and Governemntal
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH8
Land Use Map : KK-1
0
350
700
Feet
1,400

KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED
Kinnickinnic River
Portions of two municipalities within Milwaukee County are located within the Lyons Park
Creek assessment point area (KK-1). The municipalities are the cities of Greenfield and
Milwaukee. Nearly 88% of the 1.3 square mile area is located within the city of Milwaukee.
The city of Greenfield occupies the remaining 12%. The extent of the civil divisions within the
Lyons Park Creek assessment point area (KK-1) is presented in TABLE 4-7.
TABLE 4-7
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1)
Civil Division within Assessment
Point Area
(sq mi)
Percent of Assessment Point

Area within Civil Division
City of Greenfield
0.1
12.33%
City of Milwaukee
1.2
87.67%
Total
1.3
100.00%
Civil Division
Baseline Pollutant Loading and Water Quality

Water quality was characterized in terms of dissolved oxygen (DO), total phosphorus (TP), fecal
coliform (FC) and total suspended solids (TSS); however, the parameters of focus in the Lyons
Park Creek assessment point area (KK-1) are FC and DO. The largest contributor to Baseline
loads is commercial land use. It is important to recognize that land uses directly impact pollutant
loading, which in turn, directly affects water quality.
However, approximately 60% of the urban nonpoint source FC load is attributed to unknown
sources. These are sources of FC that cannot be attributed to the assumed FC loads from the
land uses in the Lyons Park Creek assessment point area (KK-1). These sources may be caused
by illicit connections to the storm sewer system, leaking sewers, or other unidentified sources.
As noted earlier, water quality is impacted by a number of factors, including pollutant loading.
In the following loading tables, the unknown sources loads are distributed amongst the
impervious land use classifications in proportion to the distribution of known sources.
The detailed assessment of FC counts in terms of days per year, FC counts as a function of
months of the year, and FC counts as compared to stream flow can be viewed in the fact sheet
presented in Appendix 4C. Based on detailed water quality modeling analyses, the assessments
of FC concentrations were characterized as moderate for the annual measure and good for the
swimming season. See Figure 4-9, Figure 4-10, and Figure 4-11 for FC data as a function of
days per year, FC data as a function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream
flow, respectively. Note: the black line on Figure 4-9 represents the cumulative number of days
at various concentrations throughout the year.
Dissolved oxygen was also analyzed in detail during the summer months. The minimum DO
concentrations were assessed as poor and the maximum DO concentrations were characterized as
very good (see habitat section for details on the interactions of DO, water temperature, and
aquatic habitat). The concentrations of DO are highly variable in the spring. This variability
suggests that there is either excessive algal growth or inputs of biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD) within the system. The decline in oxygen concentrations during the summer months is
typical and is likely due to the decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water.
4-29
Kinnickinnic River
In addition to the parameters of focus, detailed assessments were also performed on TP and TSS
data. The concentrations of TP are characterized as good within the Lyons Park Creek
assessment point area (KK-1). The concentrations of TP increase in early spring, possibly due to
fertilizer applications. The concentrations of TP are fairly consistent and generally decline
during the late spring, summer, and early fall months. This may be related in part to uptake by
plants during the growing season. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water
quality under Baseline conditions.
Total suspended solids concentrations were characterized as very good. The data indicate that
suspended solids are primarily attributed to nonpoint sources. The potential sources of
suspended solids include runoff that carries a sediment load, stream bank erosion, or resuspended stream sediments. However, note that the Lyons Park Creek assessment point area
(KK-1) contains concrete-lined reaches. As a result, re-suspension of stream sediments and
erosion likely make less of a contribution to TSS than natural reaches that experience these
processes.
In addition to the detailed analysis described above, the modeled Baseline water quality data,
summarized on an annual basis, are presented in TABLE 4-8. This table also reflects
compliance with applicable water quality standards within the assessment point area. In the
table, the level of compliance for a given water quality parameter will not necessarily match the
detailed assessment of the given parameter discussed in the next paragraph. The potential
disparity is a function of different evaluation criteria that were used. For example, where
applicable, the table evaluates compliance with water quality variance standards while the
detailed assessments are focused on habitat and do not consider special water quality variance
standards.
In the following loading tables, loads are grouped by their type, point or nonpoint, and are
further categorized by their source. Note: loads of BOD are presented in the loading tables
because BOD directly impacts the concentrations of DO. TABLE 4-9 presents the annual
pollutant loads, TABLE 4-10 presents the percentage breakdown for each load, and TABLE 4-11
presents the annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis.
4-30
Average Number of Days Per Year
Kinnickinnic River @ Lyons park Creek (RI 831)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
Average Fecal Coliform (#/100ml)
FIGURE 4-9
KK-1 DAILY FECAL COLIFORM

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-10
KK-1 MONTHLY FECAL

COLIFORM CONCENTRATIONS
Lyons Park Creek Reach 831

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Regulatory Standard- Special Variance (2,000 cfu/100 mL)
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
C onc e ntra tion (c fu/1 0 0 m L)
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Flow Duration Interval (%)
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-11
KK-1 FLOW BASED FECAL

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-8
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK
ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1)
Assessment
Water Quality
Point
Indicator
KK-1
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Lyons Park Creek
(annual)
Statistic
Mean (cells per 100 ml)
Percent compliance with single sample
standard (<2,000 cells per 100 ml)a
Geometric mean (cells per 100 ml)
Days of compliance with geometric mean

(May-September: 153
days total)
492
296
2,660
90

361
150
Dissolved Oxygen
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Percent compliance with dissolved
oxygen standard (>2 mg/l)a
6.6
6.3
100
Total Phosphorus
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Percent compliance with recommended
phosphorus standard (0.1 mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Total Nitrogen
Total Suspended Solids
Copper
a

Baseline
Condition
5,659
80
0.052
0.031
88
0.66
0.67
8.5
5.0
0.0036
0.0013
Variance Standard in Wis. Admin. Code Natural Resources (NR) 104 Uses and Designated Standards.
4-34
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-9
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop (B)
Crop (C)
Forest
Grass (B)
Grass (C)
Grass (D)
Industrial*
Pasture (B)
Transportation*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential*
Ultra Low*
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
219.3
--
--
0.55
6.14
--
311.14
--
--
--
86.52
--
1.02
0.68
--
--
0.47
TSS
tons
92.01
--
--
0.1
2.84
--
17.13
--
--
--
29.45
--
0.38
0.03
--
--
0.01
BOD
pounds
9,848
--
--
35
525
--
3,560
--
--
--
2,905
--
39
23
--
--
6.67
FC
billion counts
122,153
--
--
13,852
--
14,579
--
--
--
95,429
--
1,079
--
--
517
Units are mass or counts per year

Note: A -- indicates that the land cover is not present in the given assessment point area.
* = Impervious surface unknown source loads added to these land uses.
(B) = Hydrologic soil group B; (C) = Hydrologic soil group C; (D) = Hydrologic soil group D. The grass classes are aggregations of grass located at properties classified as
impervious land.
TABLE 4-10
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
35%
--
--
0%
1%
--
50%
--
--
--
14%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
TSS
65%
--
--
0%
2%
--
12%
--
--
--
21%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
BOD
58%
--
--
0%
3%
--
21%
--
--
--
17%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
FC
49%
--
--
0%
6%
--
6%
--
--
--
39%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
Loads
Percentages are rounded to the nearest integer. A "0%" represents a nonzero value less than 0.5%.
impervious land.
4-35
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-11
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1) (UNITS / ACRE/ YEAR)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
pounds/acre
Crop(C)
Units
TP
Crop(B)
Loads
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
0.26
--
--
0.00
0.01
--
0.36
--
--
--
0.10
--
0.00
0.00
--
--
0.00
TSS
tons/acre
0.11
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.02
--
--
--
0.03
--
0.00
0.00
--
--
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
11.54
--
--
0.04
0.62
--
4.17
--
--
--
3.40
--
0.05
0.03
--
--
0.01
FC
billion counts/acre
143
--
--
16
--
17
--
--
--
112
--
--
--
Units are mass or counts per acre per year

(B) = Hydrologic soil group B; (C) = Hydrologic soil group C; (D) = Hydrologic soil group D.
4-36
Kinnickinnic River
Baseline Habitat and Related Issues

The flashiness within the Lyons Park Creek assessment point area (KK-1) was evaluated. The
index of flashiness quantifies the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in stream flow.
In this area, the flashiness was characterized as poor. This assessment of flashiness suggests that
this reach experiences rapid increases and decreases in stream flow, which has the potential to
disturb aquatic life and habitat. There is one assessed plant community located within this
assessment point area. The quality of this community is assessed as fair. It is important to note
that all plant communities provide necessary habitat for a variety of wildlife. Dissolved oxygen
is another key factor affecting habitat suitability. Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress
aquatic life. Maintaining sufficient DO concentrations throughout the year is an important
component of aquatic habitat. However, excessive DO concentrations (greater than 15 mg/l) can
also harm aquatic life, especially during warm weather months. The minimum DO
concentrations were assessed as poor and the maximum DO concentrations were characterized as
very good. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled flashiness and water quality
parameters affecting habitat under Baseline conditions.
Year 2020 Pollutant Loading and Water Quality
Implementation of the recommendations of the SEWRPC RWQMPU would result in a 44%
reduction in Baseline FC loads and a 14% reduction in Baseline BOD loads. The major reason
for the reduction in Baseline FC loads is the RWQMPU projection that 33% of the unknown
FC source loads will be eliminated. The assumption made in the RWQMPU (Planning Report
No. 50, Chapter 10) was that 33% of the unknown sources would be identified and eliminated by
the year 2020. The 33% was determined based on professional judgment, considering the
challenges and expense of finding and fixing the sources.
Loads are grouped by their type, point or nonpoint, and are further categorized by their source.
Year 2020 water quality is presented in TABLE 4-2. Note that this table reflects compliance with
applicable water quality standards within the assessment point area. In the table, the level of
compliance for a given water quality parameter will not necessarily match the detailed
assessment of the given parameter discussed in the next paragraph. The potential disparity is a
function of different evaluation criteria that were used. For example, where applicable, the table
evaluates compliance with water quality variance standards while the detailed assessments are
focused on habitat and do not consider special water quality variance standards. TABLE 4-13
presents the Year 2020 annual pollutant loads, TABLE 4-14 presents the Year 2020 percentage
breakdown for each load, and TABLE 4-15 presents the Year 2020 annual pollutant loads on a
per acre basis.
Notwithstanding the 44% reduction in FC loading and the 14% reduction in BOD loading, water
quality modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates that the assessment of FC would remain
moderate for the annual measure and good for the swimming season measure. The assessments
of minimum DO concentrations would remain poor and the maximum DO concentrations would
remain very good. The assessments of TSS would remain unchanged as very good and TP
would remain as good. The preceding Year 2020 water quality assessments are focused on
habitat suitability and may not match the assessments in SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50,
which are based on water quality regulatory standards. Modeling of the Year 2020 conditions
indicate that the assessment of flashiness within the Lyons Park Creek assessment point area
4-37
Kinnickinnic River
(KK-1) would remain unchanged as poor. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled
water quality and flashiness under Year 2020 conditions.
TABLE 4-12
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK
Assessment
Point
Water Quality
Indicator
KK-1
Lyons Park Creek

(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
82
278

331
1,522

92
205

153
Mean (mg/l)
6.6
Median (mg/l)
6.3
Percent compliance with dissolved oxygen

standard (>2 mg/l)a
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.047
Median (mg/l)
0.029
89
Mean (mg/l)
0.61
Median (mg/l)
0.61
Mean (mg/l)
6.8
Median (mg/l)
Copper
3,184


Total Nitrogen
Year 2020
Condition
4.0
Mean (mg/l)
0.0030
Median (mg/l)
0.0011
Variance Standard in Wis. Admin Code Natural Resources (NR) 104 Uses and Designated Standards.
4-38
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-13
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
194.26
--
--
0.49
5.44
--
249.18
--
--
--
74.30
--
0.90
0.46
--
--
0.47
TSS
tons
73.41
--
--
0.09
2.26
--
13.63
--
--
--
22.78
--
0.30
0.02
--
--
0.01
BOD
pounds
8,380
--
--
32
446
--
3,031
--
--
--
2,396
--
33
16
--
--
FC
billion counts
68,976
--
--
7,820
--
8,233
--
--
--
52,238
--
609
--
--
517

(B) = Hydrologic soil group B; (C) = Hydrologic soil group C; (D) = Hydrologic soil group D. The grass classes are aggregations of grass located at properties classified as impervious
land.
TABLE 4-14
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
37%
--
--
0%
1%
--
47%
--
--
--
14%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
TSS
65%
--
--
0%
2%
--
12%
--
--
--
20%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
BOD
58%
--
--
0%
3%
--
21%
--
--
--
17%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
FC
50%
--
--
0%
6%
--
6%
--
--
--
38%
--
0%
0%
--
--
0%
Loads
(B) = Hydrologic soil group B; (C) = Hydrologic soil group C; (D) = Hydrologic soil group D. The grass classes are aggregations of grass located
at properties classified as impervious land.
4-39
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-15
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE LYONS PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-1) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.23
--
--
0.00
0.01
--
0.29
--
--
--
0.09
--
0.00
0.00
--
--
0.00
TSS
tons/acre
0.09
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.02
--
--
--
0.03
--
0.00
0.00
--
--
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
10
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
81
--
--
--
10
--
--
--
61
--
--
--

4-40

4.5.2
Kinnickinnic River
South 43rd Street Ditch (Assessment Point KK-2)
The 43rd Street Ditch is located in the northwestern portion of the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
This tributary flows southeasterly to its confluence with the mainstem of the Kinnickinnic River.
The South 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area (KK-2) encompasses 3.1 square miles and also
includes upstream portions of the Kinnickinnic River mainstem that receives flow from Lyons
Park Creek.
The South 43rd Street Ditch begins about mile southwest of the intersection of Burnham Street
and Miller Park Way. The stream flows easterly along a natural, but straightened channel to 43rd
Street. At this point, the stream enters enclosed conduit and flows southerly along 43rd Street
and then changes direction to flow about 400 feet east along Lincoln Avenue. From this point,
the stream emerges and flows southerly within a straightened natural channel. The stream reenters enclosed conduit about 700 feet south of Lincoln Avenue, flows beneath the Union Pacific
(UP) rail line. At the point where the creek emerges south of the rail line, it enters the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3), see page 4-56.
As noted above, the 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area also contains a portion of the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem. This reach of the mainstem begins immediately downstream of
the Lyons Park Creek assessment point area. This point is located at the intersection of 60th
Street and Cleveland Avenue and about three blocks south of Longfellow Elementary School.
From this point, the river enters the Kinnickinnic River Parkway and flows easterly past Miller
Park Way and into Jackson Park. Once in the park, the river changes direction and flows
northerly toward the UP rail line. At the rail line, the mainstem joins the 43rd Street Ditch, which
flows from the north. This point marks the downstream terminus of the 43rd Street Ditch
assessment point area and is the beginning of the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point
area (KK-3). This point is located at the northern end of Jackson Park within the city of
Milwaukee (Figure 4-12).
The 43rd Street Ditch flows through manufacturing and industrial land uses and where the stream
is not enclosed in conduit, the riparian widths tend to be relatively narrow. In fact, there is no
point within the assessment point area where the riparian width exceeds 75 feet. The South 43rd
Street Ditch assessment point area does not contain any dams or drop structures. In contrast, the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem flows within a natural channel through the Kinnickinnic River
Parkway, which is predominantly bordered by high-density housing with some low-density
housing located south of the parkway. The width of the riparian margin along the Kinnickinnic
River mainstem within the 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area is variable, but is generally
relatively wide throughout the Kinnickinnic River Parkway area.
Beyond the land uses adjacent to the river and the ditch, the land use within the South 43rd Street
assessment point area (KK-2) is predominantly residential, including high-density residential
(41%) and low-density residential (2%) (these are defined in the following table). Local roads
and arterial streets contribute to transportation, which makes up approximately 31% of the total
land use. The Miller Park Way corridor and former Allis Chalmers site contribute to
manufacturing and industrial land use, which make up nearly 11% of the total land use.
Recreation, natural areas, and open space along with institutional and governmental, and
commercial land uses compose the remaining 15% of the area. Based on an analysis of land use
information used to develop the water quality data, approximately 40% of the South 43rd Street
4-41
Kinnickinnic River
Ditch assessment point area is impervious. TABLE 4-16 presents the Baseline land use in the
South 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area.
TABLE 4-16
RD
LAND USE IN THE SOUTH 43 STREET DITCH


0.0
0.00%
0.1
2.17%
1.2
40.75%
Commercial
0.1
3.67%
0.1
2.62%

0.3
8.89%
Transportation
1.0
31.08%
0.3
10.82%
Total
3.1
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
Low density residential includes suburban, low, and medium density single-family residential areas (fewer than 6.9
dwelling units / net residential acre).
2
High density residential includes high density single family residential (greater than 7.0 dwelling units / net residential
acre) along with two-family, multi-family, mobile homes and residential land under development.
4-42
Nat
ve
al A
io n
lo
Be
ve
KK-2
r
Fo
Oklahoma Ave
43rd St
60th St
Linco ln Ave
tH
es
om
e
Av
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH12
Land Use Map : KK-2
0
355
710
Feet
1,420

27th St
A
it
35th St
Burnh am St
Kinnickinnic River
Portions of three municipalities within Milwaukee County are located within the South 43rd
Street assessment point area (KK-2). The municipalities are the cities of Milwaukee and West
Allis and the village of West Milwaukee. Nearly 55% of the 3.1 square mile area is located
within the city of West Allis. The city of Milwaukee occupies nearly 30% and the village of
West Milwaukee occupies the remaining 15%. The extent of the civil divisions within the South
43rd Street Ditch assessment point area (KK-2) is presented in TABLE 4-17.
TABLE 4-17
rd
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE SOUTH 43 STREET DITCH

Point Area
(sq mi)

City of Milwaukee
0.9
29.93%
City of West Allis
1.7
54.74%
0.5
15.33%
Total
3.1
100.00%
Civil Division

Water quality was characterized in terms of DO, TP, FC and TSS; however, the parameters of
focus in the South 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area (KK-2) are FC, and DO. The largest
contributor to Baseline loads is commercial land use. It is important to recognize that land uses
directly impact pollutant loading, which in turn, directly affects water quality.
land uses within the South 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area (KK-2). These sources may
be caused by illicit connections to the storm sewer system, leaking sewers, or other unidentified
sources. As noted earlier, water quality is impacted by a number of factors, including pollutant
loading. In the following loading tables, the unknown sources loads are distributed amongst
the impervious land use classifications in proportion to the distribution of known sources.
presented in Appendix 4C. Based on detailed water quality modeling analyses, the assessments
of FC concentrations were moderate for the annual measure and were good for the swimming
season measure. See Figure 4-13, Figure 4-14, and Figure 4-15 for FC data as a function of days
per year, FC data as a function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow,
respectively. Note: the black line on Figure 4-13 represents the cumulative number of days at
various concentrations throughout the year.
Dissolved oxygen and TP were also analyzed in detail. The minimum DO concentrations were
assessed as moderate during the warm weather months and the maximum DO concentrations
were characterized as very good during the same time period (see habitat section for details on
the interactions of DO, water temperature, and aquatic habitat). The concentrations of DO are
highly variable and tend to decline in winter more than would be expected. This variability
4-44
Kinnickinnic River
suggests that there is either excessive algal growth or inputs of BOD within the system. The
decline in DO concentrations during the summer months is typical and likely due to decreased
solubility of oxygen in warmer water.
In addition to the parameters of focus, a detailed assessment was also performed on TP and TSS
data. The TSS concentrations were characterized as very good. The data indicates that
concentrations increase with flows. This suggests that suspended solids are either primarily
attributed to nonpoint sources within the South 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area (KK-2) or
to in-stream erosion that would be more prevalent during high flows. Note that the South 43rd
Street Ditch assessment point area contains some concrete-lined and / or enclosed reaches. As a
result, re-suspension of stream sediments and erosion likely make less of a contribution to TSS
than natural reaches that experience these processes. The concentrations of TP are characterized
as good within the area. The concentrations of TP exceed the planning guideline 50% of the
time during the early spring. The concentrations of TP generally decline during the late spring,
summer, and early fall months. This may be related in part to uptake by plants during the
growing season. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality under
Baseline conditions.
summarized on an annual basis, are presented in TABLE 4-18. Note that this table reflects
standards.
On the following loading tables, loads are grouped by their type, point or nonpoint, and are
4-45
Kinnickinnic River @ S. 43rd Street Ditch (RI 801)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-13

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-14
KK-2 MONTHLY FECAL

South 43rd Street Ditch Reach 801

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-15

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-18
rd
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE SOUTH 43 STREET DITCH

Assessment
Point
KK-2
S. 43rd Street
Ditch
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)
Statistic

(May-September: 153
days total)
227
325
2,047
91

153
153
Dissolved Oxygen
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
9.5
9.4
100
Total Phosphorus
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Total Nitrogen
Copper

Baseline
Condition
4,080
82
0.087
0.072
85
0.81
0.78
9.2
3.8
0.0033
0.0007
4-49
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-19
rd
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE 43 STREET DITCH ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-2) (UNITS / YEAR)
340.85
--
133.75
--
57.78
1.52
1.02
SSOs
Ultra Low*
--
CSOs
Transportation*
6.27
Industrial
Residential*
0.62
Wetland
Pasture(B)
--
Industrial*
--
Grass(D)
350.01
Grass(C)
pounds
Grass(B)
TP
Government /
Institution*
Crop(C)
Units
Point Sources
Forest
Crop(B)
Loads
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
2.63
456.07
--
1.89
TSS
tons
146.84
--
--
0.11
2.9
--
18.77
--
89.25
--
19.67
0.89
0.38
0.11
1.54
--
0.05
BOD
pounds
15,718
--
--
39
536
--
3,900
--
8,529
--
1,940
65
39
90
5,424.74
--
26.66
FC
billion counts
194,960
--
--
14,142
--
15,971
--
37,535
--
63,727
529
1,079
--
2,068

land.
TABLE 4-20
rd
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE 43 STREET DITCH ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-2) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
26%
--
--
0%
0%
--
25%
--
10%
--
4%
0%
0%
0%
34%
--
0%
TSS
52%
--
--
0%
1%
--
7%
--
32%
--
7%
0%
0%
0%
1%
--
0%
BOD
43%
--
--
0%
1%
--
11%
--
23%
--
5%
0%
0%
0%
15%
--
0%
FC
59%
--
--
0%
4%
--
5%
--
11%
--
19%
0%
0%
0%
0%
--
1%
Loads
4-50
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-21
rd
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE 43 STREET DITCH ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-2) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
tons/acre
0.32
0.13
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
---
0.31
0.02
---
0.12
0.08
---
0.05
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.42
0.00
---
0.00
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
14.32
--
--
0.04
0.49
--
3.55
--
7.77
--
1.77
0.06
0.04
0.08
4.94
--
0.02
FC
billion counts/acre
178
--
--
13
--
15
--
34
--
58
--
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS

4-51
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area (KK-2) was evaluated. The
disturb aquatic life and habitat. This assessment point does not contain any assessed plant
communities. Dissolved oxygen is another key factor affecting habitat suitability. Insufficient
DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life. Maintaining sufficient DO concentrations
throughout the year is an important component of aquatic habitat. However, excessive DO
concentrations (greater than 15 mg/l) can also harm aquatic life, especially during warm weather
months. The minimum DO concentrations were assessed as moderate during the warm weather
months and the maximum DO concentrations were characterized as very good during the same
time period. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled flashiness and water quality
parameters affecting habitat under Baseline conditions.
Implementation of the recommendations of the SEWRPC RWQMPU would result in an 11%
reduction in Baseline TP loads, a 45% reduction in Baseline FC loads, and a 15% reduction in
Baseline BOD loads within the 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area. Year 2020 water quality
is presented in TABLE 4-22. Note that this table reflects compliance with applicable water
quality standards within the assessment point area. In the table, the level of compliance for a
given water quality parameter will not necessarily match the detailed assessment of the given
parameter discussed in the next paragraph. The potential disparity is a function of different
evaluation criteria that were used. For example, where applicable, the table evaluates
compliance with water quality variance standards while the detailed assessments are focused on
habitat and do not consider special water quality variance standards.
TABLE 4-23 presents the Year 2020 annual pollutant loads, TABLE 4-24 presents the Year
2020 percentage breakdown for each load, and TABLE 4-25 presents the Year 2020 annual
pollutant loads on a per acre basis. The major reason for the reduction in Baseline FC loads is
the projection in the RWQMPU that 33% of the unknown FC source loads will be eliminated.
The assumption made in the RWQMPU (Planning Report No. 50, Chapter 10) was that 33% of
the unknown sources would be identified and eliminated by the year 2020. The 33% was
determined based on professional judgment, considering the challenges and expense of finding
and fixing the sources.
Notwithstanding the 45% reduction in FC loading, the 11% reduction in TP loading and the 15%
reduction in BOD loading, water quality modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates that the
assessment of FC would remain moderate for the annual measure and good for the swimming
season measure. The assessment of minimum DO concentrations would remain moderate and the
maximum DO concentrations would remain very good. Furthermore, the assessment of TP
would remain as good and the assessments of TSS would remain unchanged as very good. The
preceding Year 2020 water quality assessments are focused on habitat suitability and may not
match the assessments in SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50, which are based on water quality
regulatory standards. Modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates that the assessment of
flashiness within the South 43rd Street Ditch assessment point area would remain unchanged as
4-52
Kinnickinnic River
poor. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality and flashiness under
Year 2020 conditions.
TABLE 4-22
rd
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE SOUTH 43 STREET DITCH
Assessment
Point
KK-2
S. 43rd Street
Ditch
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
2,280

84
132

347
1,201

92
92

153
Mean (mg/l)
9.6
Median (mg/l)
9.4

standard (>2 mg/l)a
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.082
Median (mg/l)
0.071

Total Nitrogen
Year 2020
Condition
86
Mean (mg/l)
0.77
Median (mg/l)
0.75
Mean (mg/l)
8.0
Median (mg/l)
3.4
Mean (mg/l)
0.0026
Median (mg/l)
0.0006
4-53
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-23
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE SOUTH 43
RD
STREET DITCH ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-2) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
307.35
--
--
0.35
4.63
--
275.29
--
105.18
--
55.45
--
0.95
1.49
456.07
--
1.89
TSS
tons
114.11
--
--
0.06
1.84
--
15.06
--
63.22
--
16.67
--
0.31
0.06
1.54
--
0.05
BOD
pounds
13,324
--
--
22
369
--
3,349
--
6,442
--
1,833
--
36
51
5,425
--
27
FC
billion counts
107,590
--
--
6,226
--
9,096
--
18,816
--
37,718
--
619
--
2,068
Loads
Units

land.
TABLE 4-24
RD
STREET DITCH ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-2) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
25%
--
--
0%
0%
--
23%
--
9%
--
5%
--
0%
0%
38%
--
0%
TSS
54%
--
--
0%
1%
--
7%
--
30%
--
8%
--
0%
0%
1%
--
0%
BOD
43%
--
--
0%
1%
--
11%
--
21%
--
6%
--
0%
0%
18%
--
0%
FC
59%
--
--
0%
3%
--
5%
--
10%
--
21%
--
0%
0%
0%
--
1%
Loads
4-54
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-25
RD
STREET ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-2) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.28
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.25
--
0.10
--
0.05
--
0.00
0.00
0.42
--
0.00
TSS
tons/acre
0.10
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.01
--
0.06
--
0.02
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
--
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
12
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
98
--
--
--
--
17
--
34
--
--

4-55
Kinnickinnic River
4.5.3 Kinnickinnic River Mainstem (Assessment Point KK-3)

The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) is located in the central portion
of the Kinnickinnic River watershed and flows southeasterly towards its confluence with Wilson
Park Creek. The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) encompasses 1.3
square miles and is home to Alverno College (43rd Street and Morgan Ave.) and Pilgrims Rest
Cemetery (Forest Home Avenue and 33rd Street).
This reach of the Kinnickinnic River mainstem begins south of the UP rail line and about 300
feet east of 43rd Street. This point marks the confluence of the 43rd Street Ditch and the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem. The river enters a concrete-lined channel and flows southeasterly
along the south side of the UP rail line. The river enters about 600 feet of enclosed conduit and
flows beneath two baseball diamonds located on the north end of Jackson Park. The river
emerges in the northeast corner of the park and flows southerly within a concrete-lined channel,
beneath Forest Home Avenue, towards the southeast corner of the park approximately located at
the intersection of 35th and Manitoba Streets. From this point, the river flows easterly within a
concrete-lined channel located along the south side of the Kinnickinnic River Parkway and
towards St. Lukes Hospital. The Kinnickinnic River mainstem (KK-3) assessment point area
terminates just upstream of the hospital and the rivers confluence with Wilson Park Creek. This
downstream point is approximately located at the intersection of 30th Street and Oklahoma
Avenue in the city of Milwaukee (Figure 4-16).
The river flows through recreational and high-density residential land uses. North of Forest
Home Avenue, the river flows through Jackson Park, which is a recreational area. South of
Forest Home Avenue, the river flows through the Kinnickinnic River Parkway, which is
bordered by high-density residential with some commercial land uses along Oklahoma Avenue.
Within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3), the entire reach is either
concrete-lined or enclosed within conduit. Overall, the width of the riparian margin varies, but is
mostly narrow and less than 25 feet. Approximately 25% of the river within the Kinnickinnic
River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) exceeds 75 feet. The Kinnickinnic River
mainstem assessment point area contains one dam or drop structure.
Beyond the land uses adjacent to the river, there are two main land uses within the Kinnickinnic
River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3). High-density residential land use contributes to
the greatest use at 37% (this is defined in the following table); local roads, arterial streets, and
several large parking lots contribute to transportation comprising approximately 33% of the total
land use. Jackson Park and land along the river corridor contribute to recreation, natural areas,
and open space land use comprising nearly 16% of the total land use. Institutional and
governmental, commercial, and manufacturing and industrial land uses compose the remaining
14%. Based on an analysis of land use information used to develop the water quality data,
approximately 30% of the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) is
impervious. TABLE 4-26 presents the land uses within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem
assessment point area (KK-3).
4-56
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-26
LAND USE IN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM


0.0
0.00%
0.0
0.00%
0.5
36.60%
Commercial
0.0
2.35%
0.2
11.46%

0.2
15.56%
Transportation
0.4
33.11%
0.0
0.92%
Total
1.3
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
2
4-57
lo
Be
ve
20th St
27th St
35th St
A
it
Linco ln Ave
Cleve land Av
KK-3
e
Oklahoma A
20th St
43rd St
60th St
om
35th St
r
Fo
Oklahoma Ave
tH
es
e
Av
Morga n Av
Morga n Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH16
Land Use Map : KK-3
0
345
690
Feet
1,380

Kinnickinnic River
Portions of three municipalities within Milwaukee County are located within the Kinnickinnic
River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3). The municipalities are the cities of Greenfield
and Milwaukee and the village of West Milwaukee. The city of Milwaukee occupies nearly 86%
of the 1.3 square mile area. The city of Greenfield occupies nearly 14%. The village of West
Milwaukee occupies a fraction of a percent of the land use. The extent of the civil divisions
within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) is presented in TABLE 427.
TABLE 4-27
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM
Point Area (sq mi)

City of Greenfield
0.2
13.60%
City of Milwaukee
1.1
86.40%
0.0
0.00%
Total
1.3
100.00%
Civil Division

Water quality was characterized in terms of DO, TP, FC and TSS; however, the parameter of
focus in the Kinnickinnic River is FC. The largest contributors to Baseline loads are commercial
land use for FC and grass on hydrologic group C soils for TP. It is important to recognize that
land uses directly impact pollutant loading, which in turn, directly affects water quality.
land uses within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3). These sources
may be caused by illicit connections to the storm sewer system, leaking sewers, or other
unidentified sources. As noted earlier, water quality is impacted by a number of factors,
including pollutant loading. In the following loading tables, the unknown sources loads are
distributed amongst the impervious land use classifications in proportion to the distribution of
known sources.
presented in Appendix 4C. Based on these detailed analysis, the assessments of FC
concentrations were poor for the annual measure and moderate for the swimming season
measure. See Figure 4-17, Figure 4-18, and Figure 4-19 for FC data as a function of days per
year, FC data as a function of month of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow,
In addition to the parameter of focus, detailed assessments were also performed on DO, TP and
TSS data. During the warm weather months, the minimum DO concentrations were assessed as
good and maximum DO concentrations were assessed as very good (see habitat section for
4-59
Kinnickinnic River
details on the interactions of DO, water temperature, and aquatic habitat). The concentrations of
DO are highly variable and tend to decline in winter more than would be expected. The
variability suggests that there is either excessive algal growth or inputs of BOD within the
system. The decline in DO concentrations during the summer months is typical and likely due to
decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water.
Total phosphorus was also analyzed in detail. The concentrations of TP are characterized as
good within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3). The concentrations
of TP exceed the planning guideline 50% of the time during the early spring and generally
decline during the late spring, summer, and early fall months. This may be related in part to
uptake by plants during the growing season.
The TSS concentrations were characterized as very good. Suspended solids are primarily
attributed to nonpoint sources. The potential sources of suspended solids include runoff that
carries a sediment load, stream bank erosion, or re-suspended stream sediments. However, note
that the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) contains concrete-lined and /
or enclosed reaches within its assessment point area. As a result, re-suspension of stream
sediments and erosion likely make less of a contribution to TSS than natural reaches that
experience these processes. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality
under Baseline conditions.
compliance with applicable water quality standards within the assessment point reach. In the
standards.
presents the annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis. The cumulative loads, including loads
from assessment point areas KK-1 and KK-2, are estimated within the Kinnickinnic River
mainstem assessment point area (KK-3). TABLE 4-32 presents the cumulative annual pollutant
loads, TABLE 4-33 presents the percentage breakdown for each cumulative load, and TABLE 434 presents the cumulative annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis.
4-60
Kinnickinnic River Upstream of Confluence with Wilson Park Creek

Creek (RI 710)
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-17

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-18
KK-3 MONTHLY FECAL

Kinnickinnic River Upstream of Confluence with Wilson Park Creek Reach 710
Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-19

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-28
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY IN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT

POINT AREA (KK-3)
Assessment
Water Quality
Point
Indicator
KK-3
Fecal Coliform
Kinnickinnic
Bacteria
River Upstream
(annual)
of Confluence
with Wilson
Park Creek
Fecal Coliform
Bacteria
(May-September:
153 days total)
Baseline
Condition
5,373
79
371
305
2,747
89
260
152
Dissolved Oxygen
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Total Phosphorus
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Percent compliance with
recommended phosphorus
standard (0.1 mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
0.073
0.053
85
Median (mg/l)
Mean (mg/l)
Median (mg/l)
4.2
0.0037
0.001
Total Nitrogen
Total Suspended
Solids
Copper
a
Statistic
Percent compliance with single
sample standard (<2,000 cells per
100 ml)a
Days of compliance with geometric
mean standard (<1,000 cells per
100 ml)a
Percent compliance with single
sample standard (<2,000 cells per
100 ml)a
Days of compliance with geometric
mean standard (<1,000 cells per
100 ml)a
9.4
8.8
100
0.74
0.74
10.6
4-64
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-29
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Transportation*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential*
Ultra Low*
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
435.05
--
--
2.87
12.85
--
584.1
0.21
9.56
--
137.99
--
14.93
6.59
--
--
0.95
TSS
tons
182.52
--
--
0.5
5.94
--
32.16
0.01
6.38
--
46.97
--
5.6
0.27
--
--
0.03
BOD
pounds
19,537
--
--
183
1,099
--
6,683
610
--
4,633
--
574
226
--
--
13.33
FC
billion counts
242,326
--
--
21
29,007
--
27,369
12
2,683
--
152,197
--
15,821
13
--
--
1,034

impervious land.
TABLE 4-30
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
36%
--
--
0%
1%
--
48%
0%
1%
--
11%
--
1%
1%
--
--
0%
TSS
65%
--
--
0%
2%
--
11%
0%
2%
--
17%
--
2%
0%
--
--
0%
BOD
58%
--
--
1%
3%
--
20%
0%
2%
--
14%
--
2%
1%
--
--
0%
FC
52%
--
--
0%
6%
--
6%
0%
1%
--
32%
--
3%
0%
--
--
0%
Loads
4-65
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-31
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
tons/acre
0.26
0.11
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
---
0.35
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
---
0.08
0.03
---
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
---
0.00
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
11.67
--
--
0.11
0.66
--
3.99
0.00
0.36
--
2.77
--
0.34
0.13
--
--
0.01
FC
billion counts/acre
145
--
--
17
--
16
--
91
--
--
--
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS

TABLE 4-32
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
1,004.36
--
--
4.03
25.26
--
1,236
0.21
143.31
--
282.29
1.52
16.96
9.90
456.07
--
3.31
TSS
tons
421.37
--
--
0.71
11.68
--
68.05
0.01
95.63
--
96.10
0.89
6.36
0.41
1.54
--
0.09
BOD
pounds
45,104
--
--
257
2,159
--
14,143
9,138
--
9,477
65
652
339
5,424.74
--
46.66
FC
billion counts
559,439
--
--
29
57,001
--
57,919
12
40,218
--
311,352
529
17,979
20
--
3,618
Loads
Units
Cumulative units are weights (or billion counts) per year.

Note: Note: A -- indicates that the land cover is not present in the given assessment point area.
4-66
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-33
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
32%
--
--
0%
1%
--
39%
0%
5%
--
9%
0%
1%
0%
14%
--
0%
TSS
60%
--
--
0%
2%
--
10%
0%
14%
--
14%
0%
1%
0%
0%
--
0%
BOD
52%
--
--
0%
2%
--
16%
0%
11%
--
11%
0%
1%
0%
6%
--
0%
FC
53%
--
--
0%
5%
--
6%
0%
4%
--
30%
0%
2%
0%
0%
--
0%
Loads
Cumulative percentages are rounded to the nearest integer. A "0%" represents a nonzero value less than 0.5%.
TABLE 4-34
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Transportation
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential
Ultra Low
Loads
Government /
Institution
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.277
--
--
0.001
0.007
--
0.341
0.000
0.040
--
0.078
0.000
0.005
0.003
0.126
--
0.001
TSS
tons/acre
0.116
--
--
0.000
0.003
--
0.019
0.000
0.026
--
0.027
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.000
--
0.000
BOD
pounds/acre
12.443
--
--
0.071
0.596
--
3.902
0.001
2.521
--
2.614
0.018
0.180
0.093
1.497
--
0.013
FC
billion counts/acre
154.333
--
--
0.008
15.725
--
15.978
0.003
11.095
--
85.893
0.146
4.960
0.006
0.000
--
0.998
Cumulative units are weights (or billion counts) per acre per year. A "0" represents a nonzero value less than 0.0005 pounds per acre per year.
4-67
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) was
evaluated. The index of flashiness quantifies the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in
stream flow. Within this area, the flashiness was characterized as poor. This assessment of
flashiness suggests that this reach experiences rapid increases and decreases in stream flow,
which has the potential to disturb aquatic life and habitat. There are two assessed plant
communities within this assessment point area. The assessments of quality of these plant
communities range from fair to fairly good. It is important to note that despite their quality
assessment ratings, all plant communities provide necessary habitat for a variety of wildlife.
Dissolved oxygen is another key factor affecting habitat suitability. Insufficient DO (less than
5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life. Maintaining sufficient DO concentrations throughout the year
is an important component of aquatic habitat. However, excessive DO concentrations (greater
than 15 mg/l) can also harm aquatic life, especially during warm weather months. During the
warm weather months, the minimum DO concentrations were assessed as good and maximum
DO concentrations were assessed as very good. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on
modeled flashiness and water quality parameters affecting habitat under Baseline conditions.
reduction in Baseline TP loads and a 45% reduction in Baseline FC loads within the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3). The major reason for the reduction
in Baseline FC loads is the projection in the RWQMPU that 33% of the unknown FC source
loads will be eliminated. The assumption made in the RWQMPU (Planning Report No. 50,
Chapter 10) was that 33% of the unknown sources would be identified and eliminated by the
year 2020. The 33% was determined based on professional judgment, considering the challenges
and expense of finding and fixing the sources.
Year 2020 water quality is presented in TABLE 4-35. Note that this table reflects compliance
with applicable water quality standards within the assessment point area. In the table, the level
of compliance for a given water quality parameter will not necessarily match the detailed
focused on habitat and do not consider special water quality variance standards.
pollutant loads on a per acre basis. TABLE 4-39 presents the Year 2020 cumulative annual
pollutant loads, TABLE 4-40 presents the percentage breakdown for each cumulative load, and
TABLE 4-41 presents the Year 2020 cumulative annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis.
Notwithstanding the 45% reduction in FC loading and the 16% reduction in TP loading, water
poor for the annual measure and the assessment of FC during the swimming season would
remain moderate. The assessment of TP would remain good. The assessments of TSS would
remain unchanged as very good. The assessments of the minimum and maximum concentrations
of DO would remain at good and very good, respectively. The preceding Year 2020 water
4-68
Kinnickinnic River
quality assessments are focused on habitat suitability and may not match the assessments in
SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50, which are based on water quality regulatory standards.
Modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicate that the assessment of flashiness within the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-3) would remain unchanged as poor.
See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality and flashiness under Year
2020 conditions.
TABLE 4-35
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM
Assessment
Point
KK-3
Kinnickinnic River
Upstream of
Confluence with
Wilson Park Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
82

214
335
91
152

153
Mean (mg/l)
9.4
Median (mg/l)
8.8

standard (>2 mg/l)a
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.068
Median (mg/l)
0.051
87
Mean (mg/l)
0.68
Median (mg/l)
0.69
Mean (mg/l)
8.7
Median (mg/l)
Copper
1,578


Total Nitrogen
Year 2020
Condition
3,011
3.5
Mean (mg/l)
0.0030
Median (mg/l)
0.0008
4-69
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-36
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Industrial*
Wetland
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
383.66
--
--
2.88
10.39
--
468.23
0.17
6.65
--
117.60
--
13.22
6.63
--
--
0.95
TSS
tons
144.99
--
--
0.51
4.33
--
25.61
0.01
4.00
--
36.06
--
4.46
0.27
--
--
0.03
BOD
pounds
16,550
--
--
184
853
--
5,695
407
--
3,792
--
488
227
--
--
13
FC
billion counts
136,226
--
--
21
14,947
--
15,471
1,190
--
82,683
--
8,931
14
--
--
1,034

land.
TABLE 4-37
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
38%
--
--
0%
1%
--
46%
0%
1%
--
12%
--
1%
1%
--
--
0%
TSS
66%
--
--
0%
2%
--
12%
0%
2%
--
16%
--
2%
0%
--
--
0%
BOD
59%
--
--
1%
3%
--
20%
0%
1%
--
13%
--
2%
1%
--
--
0%
FC
52%
--
--
0%
6%
--
6%
0%
0%
--
32%
--
3%
0%
--
--
0%
Loads
4-70
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-38
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.23
--
--
0.00
0.01
--
0.28
0.00
0.00
--
0.07
--
0.01
0.00
--
--
0.00
TSS
tons/acre
0.09
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.02
0.00
0.00
--
0.02
--
0.00
0.00
--
--
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
10
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
81
--
--
--
--
49
--
--
--

TABLE 4-39
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Transportation
Ultra Low
Loads
Government /
Institution
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
885.27
--
--
3.73
20.46
--
992.69
0.17
111.83
--
247.35
--
15.07
8.58
456.07
--
3.31
TSS
tons
332.52
--
--
0.65
8.44
--
54.30
0.01
67.22
--
75.51
--
5.08
0.35
1.54
--
0.09
BOD
pounds
38,254
--
--
238
1,668
--
12,075
6,850
--
8,021
--
557
294
5,425
--
47
FC
billion count
312,792
--
--
27
28,993
--
32,800
20,006
--
172,639
--
10,159
18
--
3,618

4-71
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-40
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Transportation
Ultra Low
Loads
Government /
Institution
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
32%
--
--
0%
1%
--
36%
0%
4%
--
9%
--
1%
0%
17%
--
0%
TSS
tons
61%
--
--
0%
2%
--
10%
0%
12%
--
14%
--
1%
0%
0%
--
0%
BOD
pounds
52%
--
--
0%
2%
--
16%
0%
9%
--
11%
--
1%
0%
7%
--
0%
FC
billion count
54%
--
--
0%
5%
--
6%
0%
3%
--
30%
--
2%
0%
0%
--
1%
TABLE 4-41
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-3) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Transportation
Ultra Low
Loads
Government /
Institution
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.244
--
--
0.001
0.006
--
0.274
0.000
0.031
--
0.068
--
0.004
0.002
0.126
--
0.001
TSS
tons/acre
0.092
--
--
0.000
0.002
--
0.015
0.000
0.019
--
0.021
--
0.001
0.000
0.000
--
0.000
BOD
pounds/acre
10.553
--
--
0.066
0.460
--
3.331
0.001
1.890
--
2.213
--
0.154
0.081
1.497
--
0.013
FC
billion counts/acre
86.290
--
--
0.007
7.998
--
9.049
0.002
5.519
--
47.626
--
2.803
0.005
0.000
--
0.998
4-72

4.5.4
Kinnickinnic River
Wilson Park Creek is located in the southeastern portion of the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
This tributary flows northwesterly and includes the Edgerton Ditch and its tributary area. The
Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4) encompasses 3.5 square miles and includes the
northern half of General Mitchell International Airport (GMIA) and Wispark Business Park in
the city of Cudahy.
The creek begins in the city of Cudahy, as the Edgerton Ditch, east of Whitnall Avenue and
about mile south of Layton Avenue. Edgerton Ditch flows westerly within a natural channel
and then flows beneath Whitnall and Nicholson Avenues. East of Nicholson Avenue, the
Edgerton Ditch enters enclosed conduit and continues to flow westerly towards Delaware
Avenue. It emerges on the west side of Delaware Avenue and continues to flow westerly within
a straightened natural channel beneath Pennsylvania Avenue where it enters a concrete-lined
channel. West of the UP rail line, the Edgerton Channel enters the east side of GMIA and then
changes direction and flows northerly along the east side of the airport. From this point, the
waterway is referred to as Wilson Park Creek. Other tributaries also flow northwesterly from the
city of Cudahy and from the southeastern corner of the airport. These tributaries flow into an
enclosed conduit beneath the airport and eventually flow into Wilson Park Creek northwest of
the airport. The downstream end of the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4) is
approximately one block west of Howell Avenue in the city of Milwaukee (Figure 4-20). At this
point, the creek exits the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4) and flows into the
Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8), see page 4-133.
Upstream, Wilson Park Creek, including Edgerton Ditch, flow through low and high-density
residential, manufacturing, and industrial land uses. Farther west and downstream, the creek
flows through (and beneath) GMIA. The width of the riparian margins, where the creek is not
enclosed in conduit, is less than 25 feet. The Wilson Park Creek assessment point area does not
contain any dams or drop structures.
Beyond the land uses adjancent to the creek, the land use within the Wilson Park Creek
assessment point area (KK-4) is predominantly transportation (63%) due to GMIA. Recreation,
natural areas, and open space make up approximately 12% of the total land use. Low-density
residential (this is defined in the following table) land use makes up 9% of the total land use
while manufacturing and industrial, agricultural, institutional and governmental, commercial,
and high-density residential land uses compose the remaining 16%. Based on an analysis of land
use information used to develop the water quality data, approximately 23% of the Wilson Park
Creek assessment point area (KK-4) is impervious. TABLE 4-42 presents the land uses within
the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area.
4-73
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-42
LAND USE IN THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-4)
Land Use


Agriculture
0.1
3.18%
0.3
9.38%
0.1
1.63%
Commercial
0.1
1.76%
0.1
2.88%

0.4
12.09%
Transportation
2.2
63.31%
0.2
5.77%
Total
3.5
100.00%
Notes:
1
2
4-74
Howell Ave
KK-4
6th St
Pennsy lvannia Ave
Layton Ave
Grange Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH20
Land Use Map : KK-4
0
420
840
Feet
1,680

Kinnickinnic River
Portions of three municipalities within Milwaukee County are located within the Wilson Park
Creek assessment point area (KK-4). The municipalities are the cities of Cudahy, Milwaukee,
and St. Francis. The city of Milwaukee occupies nearly 54% of the 3.5 square mile area. The
city of Cudahy occupies nearly 43% and the city of St. Francis occupies the remaining 3%. The
extent of the civil division within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4) is
presented in TABLE 4-43.
TABLE 4-43
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE WILSON PARK CREEK
Civil Division

Point Area (sq mi)

City of Cudahy
1.5
42.99%
City of Milwaukee
1.9
54.02%
City of St. Francis
0.1
2.99%
Total
3.5
100.00%

focus in Wilson Park Creek are TP, FC, and TSS. The largest contributors to Baseline loads are
commercial (FC and TSS) and grass on hydrologic group C soils (TP). It is important to
recognize that land uses directly impact pollutant loading, which in turn, directly affects water
quality.
land uses within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4). These sources may be
caused by illicit connections to the storm sewer system, leaking sewers, or other unidentified
presented in Appendix 4C. Based on detailed water quality modeling analyses, the FC
concentrations were assessed as poor for both the annual measure and swimming season. See
Figure 4-21, Figure 4-22, and Figure 4-23 for FC data as a function of days per year, FC data as
a function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow, respectively. Note:
the black line on Figure 4-21 represents the cumulative number of days at various concentrations
throughout the year.
Total phosphorus and TSS were also analyzed in detail. The assessment of TP concentrations
within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area was moderate. The concentrations of TP
exceed 5 mg/l on some days and are very high during the winter months. This might be caused
by deicing fluids used at GMIA. Deicing fluids often contain phosphorus compounds that serve
4-76
Kinnickinnic River
as corrosion inhibitors. The concentrations of TP decline through the late spring, summer and
early fall, which may reflect uptake by plants during the growing season.
Total suspended solids concentrations were characterized as poor. The data suggest that
suspended solids include runoff that carries a sediment load, stream bank erosion, or resuspended stream sediments. However, note that the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area
contains concrete-lined and / or enclosed reaches. As a result, re-suspension of stream sediments
and erosion likely make less of a contribution to TSS than natural reaches that experience these
processes.
In addition to the parameters of focus, a detailed assessment was also performed on DO data.
During the warm weather months, the minimum and maximum DO concentrations were both
assessed as very good (see habitat section for details on the interactions of DO, water
temperature, and aquatic habitat). They tended to be somewhat variable within the Wilson Park
Creeks assessment point area (KK-4). On the low end of the range, DO concentrations decline
more than would be expected, which suggests that there could be sources of BOD within the
area. In the past, BOD loadings were likely higher with the use of glycol at the airport, but now
that deicing fluids are captured at GMIA and treated at South Shore Water Reclamation Facility
(SSWRF), BOD loadings should be declining, thus elevating DO levels, especially during the
winter months. The decline in DO concentrations during the summer months is typical and is
likely due to the decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water. See Chapter 6, section 6.4 for
more detail on modeled water quality under Baseline conditions.
standards.
pollutant loads, TABLE 4-46 presents the percentage breakdown for each load, TABLE 4-47
4-77
Kinnickinnic River @ Wison Park Creek Upstream of Holmes Avenue

Creek (RI 828)
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400

FIGURE 4-21

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-22
KK-4 MONTHLY FECAL

Wilson Park Creek Upstream of Holmes Avenue Creek Reach 828

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Regulatory Standard (400 cfu/100 mL)
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-23

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-44
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-4
Wilson Creek
Upstream of
Holmes Avenue
Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
52
609

standard (<200 cells per 100 ml)
54
2,179

67
313

36
Mean (mg/l)
7.5
Median (mg/l)
7.3

oxygen standard (>5 mg/l)
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.144
Median (mg/l)
0.04
81
Mean (mg/l)
1.12
Median (mg/l)
0.5
Mean (mg/l)
20.1
Median (mg/l)
Copper
3,897


Total Nitrogen
Baseline
Condition
6.5
Mean (mg/l)
0.0041
Median (mg/l)
0.0019
4-81
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-45
BASELINE LOAD FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-4) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
463.11
6.46
2.63
3.48
12.09
80.99
986.79
--
193.80
0.08
56.67
16.25
0.73
22.67
320.65
--
14.77
TSS
tons
210.53
7.32
3.01
0.47
5.71
2.72
37.14
--
144.56
0.02
19.68
9.71
0.28
0.75
3.15
--
0.42
BOD
pounds
billion
counts
20,797
290
114
204
1,033
1,115
10,852
--
12,359
1,902
72,667
28
782
5,629.57
--
208.17
257,538
49
34
23
27,225
1,695
48,792
--
54,304
61,958
5,636
775
46
--
16,143
Loads
Units
FC

land.
TABLE 4-46
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-4) (PERCENT)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
4%
45%
--
9%
0%
TSS
47%
2%
1%
0%
1%
1%
8%
--
32%
0%
BOD
16%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
8%
--
10%
0%
FC
54%
0%
0%
0%
6%
0%
10%
--
11%
0%
SSOs
Grass(D)
1%
CSOs
Grass(C)
0%
Industrial
Grass(B)
0%
Wetland
Government /
Institution*
0%
Ultra Low*
Forest
21%
Transportation*
Crop(C)
TP
Loads
Residential*
Crop(B)
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
3%
1%
0%
1%
15%
--
1%
4%
2%
0%
0%
1%
--
0%
1%
57%
0%
1%
4%
--
0%
13%
1%
0%
0%
0%
--
3%
4-82
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-47
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-4) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
tons/acre
0.19
0.08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.40
0.01
---
0.08
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.13
0.00
---
0.01
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
8.40
0.12
0.05
0.08
0.42
0.45
4.38
--
4.99
0.00
0.77
29.34
0.01
0.32
2.27
--
0.08
FC
billion counts/acre
104
11
20
--
22
25
--
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS

4-83
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4) was evaluated. The
Within this area, the flashiness was characterized as moderate. The Wilson Park Creek
assessment point area does not contain any assessed plant communities. Dissolved oxygen is
another key factor affecting habitat suitability. Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress
aquatic life. Maintaining sufficient DO concentrations throughout the year is an important
component of aquatic habitat. However, excessive DO concentrations (greater than 15 mg/l) can
also harm aquatic life, especially during warm weather months. During the warm weather
months, the minimum and maximum DO concentrations were both assessed as very good. See
Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled flashiness and water quality parameters
affecting habitat under Baseline conditions.
Baseline TSS loads within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4). The major
reason for the reduction in Baseline FC loads is the projection in the RWQMPU that 33% of the
unknown FC source loads will be eliminated. The assumption made in the RWQMPU
(Planning Report No. 50, Chapter 10) was that 33% of the unknown sources would be identified
and eliminated by the year 2020. The 33% was determined based on professional judgment,
considering the challenges and expense of finding and fixing the sources.
Year 2020 water quality within this assessment point area is presented in TABLE 4-48. This
table also reflects compliance with applicable water quality standards within the assessment
point area. In the table, the level of compliance for a given water quality parameter will not
necessarily match the detailed assessment of the given parameter discussed in the next
paragraph. The potential disparity is a function of different evaluation criteria that were used.
For example, where applicable, the table evaluates compliance with water quality variance
standards while the detailed assessments are focused on habitat and do not consider special water
quality variance standards.
pollutant loads on a per acre basis.
Notwithstanding the 45% reduction in FC loading, the 13% reduction in TP loading, and the
19% reduction in TSS loading, water quality modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates that
the assessment of FC would remain poor for both the annual and swimming season measures, the
assessment of TP would remain moderate, and the assessment of TSS would remain poor. The
assessments of minimum and maximum DO concentrations would remain unchanged as very
good. The preceding Year 2020 water quality assessments are focused on habitat suitability and
may not match the assessments in SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50, which are based on water
quality regulatory standards. Modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates that the assessment
of flashiness within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-4) would remain
unchanged as moderate. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality
and flashiness under Year 2020 conditions.
4-84
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-48
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-4
Wilson Park Creek
Upstream of
Holmes Avenue
Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
2,091

58
330

126
1,024

75
155

80
Mean (mg/l)
7.6
Median (mg/l)
7.3

standard (>5 mg/l)
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.141
Median (mg/l)
0.039

Total Nitrogen
Year 2020
Condition
83
Mean (mg/l)
1.08
Median (mg/l)
0.45
Mean (mg/l)
15.1
Median (mg/l)
5.4
Mean (mg/l)
0.0035
Median (mg/l)
0.0017
4-85
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-49
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-4) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
460.22
--
--
2.56
12.47
63.95
751.26
--
183.81
--
55.28
14.13
0.75
18.70
320.65
--
3.21
TSS
tons
176.73
--
--
0.35
4.77
2.07
27.30
--
120.85
--
16.17
7.44
0.24
0.62
3.15
--
0.09
BOD
pounds
20,117
--
--
150
960
925
8,693
--
11,169
--
1,927
72,547
29
645
5,630
--
45
FC
billion counts
149,557
--
--
17
14,209
930
25,857
--
31,105
--
33,559
2,879
440
38
--
3,511
Loads
Units

impervious land.
TABLE 4-50
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-4) (PERCENT)
Loads
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
24%
--
--
0%
1%
3%
40%
--
10%
--
3%
1%
0%
1%
17%
--
0%
TSS
49%
--
--
0%
1%
1%
8%
--
34%
--
4%
2%
0%
0%
1%
--
0%
BOD
16%
--
--
0%
1%
1%
7%
--
9%
--
2%
59%
0%
1%
5%
--
0%
FC
57%
--
--
0%
5%
0%
10%
--
12%
--
13%
1%
0%
0%
0%
--
1%
(B) = Hydrologic soil group B; (C) = Hydrologic soil group C; (D) = Hydrologic soil group D. The grass classes are aggregations of grass located at
properties classified as impervious land
4-86
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-51
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-4) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.19
--
--
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.30
--
0.07
--
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.13
--
0.00
TSS
tons/acre
0.07
--
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
--
0.05
--
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
--
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
--
--
--
--
29
--
FC
billion counts/acre
60
--
--
10
--
13
--
14
--

4-87
Kinnickinnic River
4.5.5 Holmes Avenue Creek (Assessment Point KK-5)

Holmes Avenue Creek is located in the southern portion of the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
This tributary flows northerly to its confluence with Wilson Park Creek. The Holmes Avenue
Creek assessment point area (KK-5) encompasses 1.7 square miles. The creek begins west of I94 about mile north of Grange Avenue in the city of Milwaukee. From there, it flows
northeasterly beneath I-94 and then enters enclosed conduit. The creek continues to flow
northeasterly to a point just east of the Canadian Pacific (CP) rail line and about mile west of
Holler Park. At this point, the creek emerges and flows northerly within a concrete-line channel.
In the vicinity of 10th Street and Carpenter Avenue, the creek changes direction and flows
easterly past 6th Street and then changes direction again and flows northerly toward Layton
Avenue. Approximately 500 feet north of Layton Avenue, the creek flows into the Wilson Park
Creek assessment point area (Figure 4-24).
The Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area also contains a tributary to Holmes Avenue
Creek. This tributary flows northeasterly from the airport spur to its confluence with Holmes
Avenue Creek, just over a mile southwest of the intersection of Layton and Howell Avenues.
Upstream of the confluence, the 1-mile reach of this tributary is entirely enclosed within conduit.
Holmes Avenue Creek flows through high-density residential, manufacturing and industrial land
uses. Most of the creek flows within enclosed conduit or concrete-lined channel. The Holmes
Avenue Creek assessment point area does not contain any dams or drop structures. The width of
the riparian margin is narrow; the width of the riparian margin does not exceed 25 feet.
Beyond the land use adjacent to the creek, the land use within the Holmes Avenue Creek
assessment point area (KK-5) is predominantly transportation (48%), including GMIA,
highways, and large parking lots. Low-density residential makes up approximately 25% of the
total land use (this is defined in the following table). Recreation, natural areas, and open space
land use make up 9% of the total land use while manufacturing and industrial, high-density
residential, commercial, and institutional and governmental land uses compose the remaining
approximately 43% of the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area (KK-5) is impervious.
TABLE 4-52 presents the land uses within the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area.
4-88
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-52
LAND USE IN THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK


0.0
0.00%
0.4
25.32%
0.1
5.13%
Commercial
0.1
3.23%
0.0
2.29%

0.2
8.74%
Transportation
0.8
47.85%
0.1
7.44%
Total
1.7
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
Low density residential includes suburban, low, and medium density single-family residential areas (fewer than 6.9 dwelling units /
net residential acre).
2
High density residential includes high density single family residential (greater than 7.0 dwelling units / net residential acre) along
with two-family, multi-family, mobile homes and residential land under development.
4-89
13th St
20th St
27th St
35th St
Howe ll Ave
6th St
KK-5
Layton Ave
Edge rton Ave
Grange Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH24
Land Use Map : KK-5
0
335
670
Feet
1,340

Kinnickinnic River
The Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area (KK-5) is occupied by one municipality. The
city of Milwaukee occupies the entire 1.7 square mile area, as shown in TABLE 4-53.
TABLE 4-53
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK
Civil Division within

City of Milwaukee
1.7
100.00%
Total
1.7
100.00%
Civil Division

focus in Holmes Avenue Creek are TP and FC. The largest contributor to Baseline FC and BOD
loads are commercial land use; the largest contributors to Baseline TP loads are industrial,
commercial, and grass on hydrologic group C soils. It is important to recognize that land uses
land uses within the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area. These sources may be caused
by illicit connections to the storm sewer system, leaking sewers, or other unidentified sources.
In the following loading tables, the unknown sources loads are distributed amongst the
impervious land use classifications in proportion to the distribution of known sources.
concentrations were assessed as poor for the annual measure and good for the swimming season
year, FC data as a function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow,
The concentrations of TP were characterized as moderate. The concentrations of TP tend to be
greatest at high flows, with concentrations exceeding the 0.1 mg/l planning guideline nearly 75%
of the time during high flows. This suggests that nonpoint source loads of TP are present within
the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area (KK-5).
In addition to the parameters of focus, detailed assessments were also performed on DO and TSS
data. The concentrations of minimum and maximum DO concentrations were both assessed as
good during the warm weather months (see habitat section for details on the interactions of DO,
water temperature, and aquatic habitat). The DO concentrations exhibit considerable variability,
particularly during the spring months. This variability could be explained by excessive attached
4-91
Kinnickinnic River
algae growth or inputs of BOD. The decline in DO concentrations during the summer months is
typical and is likely due to the decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water.
Total suspended solids concentrations were characterized as very good. The data indicate that
suspended solids include runoff that carries a sediment load, stream bank erosion, or resuspended stream sediments. However, note that the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point
area (KK-5) contains concrete-lined and / or enclosed reaches. As a result, re-suspension of
stream sediments and erosion likely make less of a contribution to TSS than natural reaches that
experience these processes. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality
standards.
further categorized by their source. Note: loads of BOD are presented in the loading tables and
BOD directly impacts the concentrations of DO. TABLE 4-55 presents the annual pollutant
loads, TABLE 4-56 presents the percentage breakdown for each load, and TABLE 4-57 presents
the annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis.
4-92
Kinnickinnic River @ Holmes Avenue Creek (RI 830)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-25

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-26
KK-5 MONTHLY FECAL

Holmes Avenue Creek Reach 830

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-27

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-54
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-5
Holmes Avenue
Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
5,178

72
385

106
2,162

86
213

58
Mean (mg/l)
9.9
Median (mg/l)
9.8

92
Mean (mg/l)
0.131
Median (mg/l)
0.072

Total Nitrogen
Baseline
Condition
77
Mean (mg/l)
1.24
Median (mg/l)
0.91
Mean (mg/l)
9.7
Median (mg/l)
3.8
Mean (mg/l)
0.0040
Median (mg/l)
0.0009
4-96
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-55
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-5) (UNITS / YEAR)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
--
1.33
4.56
3.62
376.91
0.27
50.50
--
TSS
tons
188.71
--
--
0.18
2.15
0.12
14.18
0.01
37.66
--
BOD
pounds
billion
counts
18,642
--
--
78
390
50
4,145
3,220
--
230,847
--
--
10,271
76
18,636
16
14,149
--
FC
46.62
104.11
0.73
16.19
62.19
0.28
1,565
16,274
28
50,971
36,112
775
SSOs
Grass(D)
--
CSOs
Grass(C)
415.11
Industrial
Grass(B)
pounds
Wetland
Government /
Institution*
TP
Ultra Low*
Forest
Units
Transportation*
Crop(C)
Loads
Residential*
Crop(B)
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
2.47
441.64
--
--
0.08
0.40
--
--
85
1,123.94
--
--
--
--

land.
TABLE 4-56
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-5) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
29%
--
--
0%
0%
0%
26%
0%
3%
--
3%
7%
0%
0%
31%
--
--
Loads
TSS
59%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
4%
0%
12%
--
5%
19%
0%
0%
0%
--
--
BOD
41%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
9%
0%
7%
--
3%
36%
0%
0%
2%
--
--
FC
64%
--
--
0%
3%
0%
5%
0%
4%
--
14%
10%
0%
0%
0%
--
--
4-97
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-57
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-5) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
tons/acre
0.39
0.18
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.35
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.05
0.04
---
0.04
0.02
0.10
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.41
0.00
---
---
BOD
pounds/acre
17.37
--
--
0.07
0.36
0.05
3.86
0.00
3.00
--
1.46
15.17
0.03
0.08
1.05
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
215
--
--
10
17
13
--
48
34
--
--
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS

4-98
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area (KK-5) was evaluated.
The index of flashiness quantifies the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in stream
flow. Within this area, the flashiness was characterized as poor. This assessment of flashiness
suggests that this reach experiences rapid increases and decreases in stream flow, which has the
potential to disturb aquatic life and habitat. There is one assessed plant community located
within the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area. The quality assessment of the plant
communtiy is fair. It is important to note that all plant communities provide necessary habitat
for a variety of wildlife. Dissolved oxygen is another key factor affecting habitat suitability.
Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life. Maintaining sufficient DO
concentrations throughout the year is an important component of aquatic habitat. However,
excessive DO concentrations (greater than 15 mg/l) can also harm aquatic life, especially during
warm weather months. The concentrations of minimum and maximum DO concentrations were
both assessed as good during the warm weather months. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more
detail on modeled flashiness and water quality parameters affecting habitat under Baseline
conditions.
Implementation of the recommendations of the SEWRPC RWQMPU would result in an 11%
Baseline BOD loads within the Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area (KK-5). The major
Year 2020 water quality is presented in TABLE 4-58. This table also reflects compliance with
16% reduction in BOD loading, water quality modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates
that the assessment of FC would remain poor for the annual measure and good for the swimming
season measure. The assessment of TP would remain moderate and both the minimum and
maximum concentrations of DO would remain good during the warm weather months. The
assessments of TSS would remain unchanged as very good. The preceding Year 2020 water
4-99
Kinnickinnic River
Holmes Avenue Creek assessment point area (KK-5) would remain unchanged as poor. See
Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality and flashiness under Year 2020
conditions.
TABLE 4-58
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-5
Holmes Avenue
Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
2,824

73
213

199
1,192

85
120

111
Mean (mg/l)
9.9
Median (mg/l)
9.8

standard (>5 mg/l)
92
Mean (mg/l)
0.124
Median (mg/l)
0.069

Total Nitrogen
Year 2020
Condition
78
Mean (mg/l)
1.18
Median (mg/l)
0.86
Mean (mg/l)
7.8
Median (mg/l)
3.1
Mean (mg/l)
0.0033
Median (mg/l)
0.0008
4-100
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-59
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-5) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Pasture(B)
Wetland
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
363.64
--
--
1.13
4.02
2.73
288.77
0.17
47.26
--
40.49
90.19
0.61
1.59
441.64
--
--
TSS
tons
144.94
--
--
0.15
1.66
0.09
10.49
0.01
31.07
--
12.32
47.48
0.20
0.05
0.40
--
--
BOD
pounds
billion
counts
15,602
--
--
66
325
39
3,341
2,872
--
1,310
15,495
22
55
1,124
--
--
126,860
--
--
5,607
40
9,939
8,358
--
27,581
19,742
400
--
--
FC

land.
TABLE 4-60
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-5) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
28%
--
--
0%
0%
0%
23%
0%
4%
--
3%
7%
0%
0%
34%
--
--
TSS
58%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
4%
0%
12%
--
5%
19%
0%
0%
0%
--
--
BOD
39%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
8%
0%
7%
--
3%
38%
0%
0%
3%
--
--
FC
64%
--
--
0%
3%
0%
5%
0%
4%
--
14%
10%
0%
0%
0%
--
--
Loads
4-101
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-61
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE HOLMES AVENUE CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-5) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.34
--
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.27
0.00
0.04
--
0.04
0.08
0.00
0.00
0.41
--
--
TSS
tons/acre
0.14
--
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.03
--
0.01
0.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
--
--
BOD
pounds/acre
15
--
--
--
14
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
118
--
--
--
26
18
--
--

4-102
Kinnickinnic River
4.5.6 Villa Mann Creek (Assessment Point KK-6)

Villa Mann Creek is located in the south-central portion of the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
This tributary flows northeasterly to its confluence with Wilson Park Creek.
The Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6) encompasses 1.1 square miles. The creek
begins just northeast of 35th Street and Layton Avenue, about mile north of Barnard Park and
Greenfield Middle School. From this point, the creek flows northeasterly within a natural
channel through a high-density residential neighborhood and then flows beneath I-894. North of
I-894, the creek continues to flow northeasterly towards 27th Street. On the east side of 27th
Street and north of the 27th Street interchange on I-894, the creek enters enclosed conduit and
flows easterly to a point about mile northeast of the interchange (Figure 4-28). This point
marks the downstream terminus of Villa Mann Creek assessment point (KK-6). This is also
Villa Mann Creeks confluence with another stream within the assessment point area. This is a
mile-long tributary that flows northerly within enclosed conduit and a natural channel.
Downstream, Villa Mann Creek flows into the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8),
see page 4-133.
The upstream and westernmost reach of Villa Mann Creek, south of I-894, flows through a high
density residential area. North of this area, downstream, the creek flows through transportation
land uses associated with I-894 and the 27th Street interchange on I-894. East of 27th Street, the
creek flows within enclosed conduit, beneath an undeveloped area located east of the 27th Street
commercial area. In general, the width of the riparian margin along Villa Mann Creek is
relatively narrow. The width is typically less than 25 feet, but in some areas located north of I894, the riparian width widens to between 50 and 75 feet (but never exceeds 75 feet). There are
three dams or drop structures located within the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area.
Beyond the land use adjacent to the creek, the land use within the Villa Mann Creek assessment
point area (KK-6) is predominantly low-density residential (42%) and high-density residential
(8%) land uses (these are defined in the following table). Interstate highway, local roads and
arterials contribute to transportation land uses that make up approximately 34% of the total land
use. Commercial land use along with recreation, natural areas, and open space, institutional and
governmental, and manufacturing and industrial land uses compose the remaining 16%. Based
on an analysis of land use information used to develop the water quality data, approximately
34% of the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6) is impervious. TABLE 4-62
presents the land uses within the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area.
4-103
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-62
LAND USE IN THE VILLA MANN CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6)

0.0
0.00%
0.4
41.53%
0.1
8.35%
Commercial
0.1
6.84%
0.0
3.11%
Outdoor Recreation,
Wetlands, Woodlands, and
Open Space
0.1
6.17%
Transportation
0.4
33.91%
0.0
0.09%
Total
1.1
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
2
4-104
KK-6
Boliva r Ave
6th St
13th St
20th St
27th St
35th St
Layto n Ave
Edgerton Ave
Grang e Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH28
Land Use Map : KK-6
0
335
670
Feet
1,340

Kinnickinnic River
Portions of two municipalities within Milwaukee County are located within the Villa Mann
Milwaukee. Nearly 74% of the 1.1 square mile area is located within the city of Greenfield. The
city of Milwaukee occupies the remaining 26%. The extent of the civil divisions within the Villa
Mann Creek assessment point area is presented in TABLE 4-63.
TABLE 4-63
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE VILLA MANN ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6)
Point Area
(sq mi)
Percent of Assessment Point Area

within Civil Division
City of Greenfield
0.8
74.05%
City of Milwaukee
0.3
25.95%
Total
1.1
100.00%
Civil Division

focus within the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6) are FC and DO. The largest
contributors to Baseline loads are commercial (FC and BOD) and grass on hydrologic group C
soils (TP). It is important to recognize that land uses directly impact pollutant loading, which in
turn, directly affects water quality.
land uses within the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6). These sources may be
concentrations were assessed as poor for the annual measure and good for the swimming season
year, FC data as a function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow,
Dissolved oxygen was also analyzed in detail. The minimum DO concentrations were assessed
as poor during the warm weather months. The maximum DO concentrations were characterized
as very good during the same time period (see habitat section for details on the interactions of
DO, water temperature, and aquatic habitat). The DO concentrations within the Villa Mann
Creek assessment point area (KK-6) exhibit considerable variability, particularly during the
spring months. This variability could be explained by excessive attached algae growth or inputs
of BOD. The decline in DO concentrations during the summer months is typical and is likely
4-106
Kinnickinnic River
due to the decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water. However, the decline during the
summer months is greater than would normally be expected.
In addition to the parameters of focus, detailed assessments were also performed on TP and TSS
data. The concentrations of TP were characterized as good. The concentrations of TP tend to be
greatest at high flows, with concentrations exceeding the 0.1 mg/l planning guideline nearly 50%
of the time during high flows. This suggests that nonpoint source loads of TP are present within
Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6).
The TSS concentrations were characterized as very good. The data indicate that suspended
solids are primarily attributed to nonpoint sources. The potential sources of suspended solids
include runoff that carries a sediment load, stream bank erosion, or re-suspended stream
sediments. However, the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6) contains concretelined and / or enclosed reaches. As a result, re-suspension of stream sediments and erosion likely
make less of a contribution to TSS than natural reaches that experience these processes. See
Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality under Baseline conditions.
In addition to the detailed analyses described above, the modeled Baseline water quality data,
summarized on an annual basis, are presented in TABLE 4-64. This table also reflects
standards.
4-107
Kinnickinnic River @ Villa Mann Creek (RI 820)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-29

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-30
KK-6 MONTHLY FECAL

Villa Mann Creek Reach 820

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-31

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-64
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-6
Villa Mann Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
5,565

72
557

38
2,339

87
346

19
Mean (mg/l)
7.4
Median (mg/l)
6.6

standard (>5 mg/l)
70
Mean (mg/l)
0.061
Median (mg/l)
0.034

Total Nitrogen
Baseline
Condition
85
Mean (mg/l)
0.70
Median (mg/l)
0.74
Mean (mg/l)
8.9
Median (mg/l)
5.0
Mean (mg/l)
0.0041
Median (mg/l)
0.0013
4-111
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-65
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
200.84
--
--
0.36
3.62
5.34
281.04
--
0.47
--
41.87
63.57
1.01
1.11
--
--
--
TSS
tons
91.31
--
--
0.05
1.71
0.18
10.58
--
0.35
--
14.54
37.97
0.39
0.04
--
--
--
BOD
pounds
9,019
--
--
21
309
74
3,091
--
30
--
1,406
2,725
39
38
--
--
--
FC
billion counts
111,690
--
--
8,151
112
13,896
--
131
--
45,782
22,050
1,065
--
--
--
Loads
Units

** = Impervious surface unknown source loads added to these land uses.
land.
TABLE 4-66
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
34%
--
--
0%
1%
1%
47%
--
0%
--
7%
11%
0%
0%
--
--
--
TSS
58%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
7%
--
0%
--
9%
24%
0%
0%
--
--
--
BOD
54%
--
--
0%
2%
0%
18%
--
0%
--
8%
16%
0%
0%
--
--
--
FC
55%
--
--
0%
4%
0%
7%
--
0%
--
23%
11%
1%
0%
--
--
--
4-112
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-67
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
tons/acre
0.29
0.13
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.41
0.02
---
0.00
0.00
---
0.06
0.02
0.09
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
---
---
pounds/acre
13.17
--
--
0.03
0.45
0.11
4.51
--
0.04
--
2.05
3.98
0.06
0.06
--
--
--
billion counts/acre
163
--
--
12
20
--
--
67
32
--
--
--
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS
BOD
FC
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources

4-113
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6) was evaluated. The
disturb aquatic life and habitat. The Villa Mann Creek assessment point area does not contain
any assessed plant communities. Dissolved oxygen is another key factor affecting habitat
suitability. Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life. Maintaining sufficient
DO concentrations throughout the year is an important component of aquatic habitat. However,
warm weather months. The minimum DO concentrations were assessed as poor during the warm
weather months. The maximum DO concentrations were characterized as very good during the
same time period. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled flashiness and water
quality parameters affecting habitat under Baseline conditions.
Baseline BOD loads within the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area (KK-6). The major
Year 2020 water quality is presented in TABLE 4-68. This table also reflects compliance with
that the assessment of FC would remain poor for the annual measure and remain good for the
swimming season measure. The assessments of minimum DO concentrations would remain poor
and the maximum DO concentrations would remain very good. The assessment of TP would
remain good and the assessment of TSS would remain unchanged as very good. The preceding
Year 2020 water quality assessments are focused on habitat suitability and may not match the
assessments in SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50, which are based on water quality regulatory
standards. Modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicate that the assessment of flashiness
within the Villa Mann Creek assessment point area would remain unchanged as poor. See
4-114
Kinnickinnic River
conditions.
TABLE 4-68
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-6
Villa Mann Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
3,041

73
309

122
1,294

85
196

68
Mean (mg/l)
7.4
Median (mg/l)
6.7

standard (>5 mg/l)
71
Mean (mg/l)
0.054
Median (mg/l)
0.032

Total Nitrogen
Year 2020 Condition
87
Mean (mg/l)
0.62
Median (mg/l)
0.65
Mean (mg/l)
7.3
Median (mg/l)
3.7
Mean (mg/l)
0.0033
Median (mg/l)
0.0010
4-115
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-69
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
178.26
--
--
0.19
3.19
4.16
216.36
0.03
0.00
--
36.83
55.12
0.62
0.39
--
--
--
TSS
tons
70.98
--
--
0.03
1.31
0.13
7.86
0.00
0.00
--
11.20
29.02
0.21
0.01
--
--
--
BOD
pounds
7,652
--
--
11
257
60
2,504
0.00
0.00
--
1,194
2,252
23
13
--
--
--
FC
billion counts
62,117
--
--
4,428
61
7,447
--
25,023
12,067
407
--
--
--
Loads
Units

land.
TABLE 4-70
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6) (PERCENT)
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
1%
Residential*
0%
Pasture(B)
Government /
Institution*
--
Industrial*
Forest
--
Grass(D)
Crop(C)
36%
Grass(C)
Crop(B)
TP
Loads
Point Sources
Grass(B)
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
1%
44%
0%
0%
--
7%
11%
0%
0%
--
--
--
TSS
59%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
7%
0%
0%
--
9%
24%
0%
0%
--
--
--
BOD
55%
--
--
0%
2%
0%
18%
0%
0%
--
9%
16%
0%
0%
--
--
--
FC
56%
--
--
0%
4%
0%
7%
0%
0%
--
22%
11%
0%
0%
--
--
--
properties classified as impervious land.
4-116
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-71
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE VILLA MANN CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-6) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.26
--
--
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.32
0.00
0.00
--
0.05
0.08
0.00
0.00
--
--
--
TSS
tons/acre
0.10
--
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.00
--
0.02
0.04
0.00
0.00
--
--
--
BOD
pounds/acre
11
--
--
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
91
--
--
11
--
37
18
--
--
--

4-117
Kinnickinnic River
4.5.7 Cherokee Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-7)

Cherokee Park Creek is located in the south-central portion of the Kinnickinnic River watershed.
This tributary flows northeasterly to its confluence with Wilson Park Creek. The Cherokee Park
Creek assessment point area (KK-7) encompasses one square mile. The creek begins east of the
Park and Ride facility located on the north side of I-894 and east of Loomis Road within the city
of Greenfield. From this point, the creek flows northeasterly within a natural channel. The creek
enters enclosed conduit at 36th Street and generally continues to flow north and northeasterly.
The creek emerges along the south side of Arlington Cemetery; from this point, the creek flows
northerly within enclosed conduit and concrete-lined channel towards the center of the cemetery.
There is also a tributary to the Cherokee Park Creek that flows northeasterly through the
Cherokee Park Creek assessment point area (KK-7). This tributary generally flows within a
natural channel and begins east of Good Hope Cemetery, flows underneath 43rd Street, and then
flows northeasterly through Zablocki Park and Golf Course. At the intersection of Loomis Road
and 35th Street, the tributary changes direction and flows easterly towards the center of Arlington
Cemetery and its confluence with Cherokee Park Creek. From the center of the cemetery, the
creek flows northerly, beneath Howard Avenue, and along the west side of the Loomis Center
Mall. On the north side of Loomis Road, the creek continues to flow northerly within enclosed
conduit beneath the Point Loomis Shopping Center (Figure 4-32). On the north side of Morgan
Avenue and immedialy east of Curtin Elementary School, Cherokee Park Creek flows into
Wilson Park Creek and into the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8), see page 4133.
With a few exceptions, the width of the riparian margin along Cherokee Park Creek is relatively
narrow and less than 25 feet. Approximately 20% of the creek within the assessment point area
has a riparian margin that exceeds 75 feet. There is a dam or drop structurewithin the Cherokee
Park Creek assessment point area. Towards the southern headwaters of the creek, it flows
through low density residential land uses and then flows through the Arlington Cemetery.
Between the north side of the cemetery and its confluence with Wilson Park Creek, Cherokee
Park Creek flows through high-density residential and commercial land uses.
Beyond the land use adjacent to the creek, the land use within the Cherokee Park Creek
assessment point area (KK-7) is predominantly transportation, including highways, local roads,
and arterial streets (31%). High-density residential (18%) and low-density residential (17%) also
contribute to the total land use (these are defined in the following table). The two large
cemeteries contribute to institutional and governmental land uses that make up nearly 16% of the
total land use. Recreation, natural areas, and open space along with commercial, and
manufacturing and industrial land uses compose the remaining 17%. Based on an analysis of
land use information used to develop the water quality data, approximately 27% of the Cherokee
Park Creek assessment point area (KK-7) is impervious. TABLE 4-72 presents the land uses
within the Cherokee Park Creek assessment point area.
4-118
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-72
LAND USE IN THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-7)

0.0
0.00%
0.2
17.28%
0.2
17.61%
Commercial
0.0
3.04%
0.2
15.99%

0.1
13.99%
Transportation
0.3
31.08%
0.0
1.01%
Total
1.0
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
2
4-119
13t
20t
35th
43rd S
60th St
27th
Morga n Ave
KK-7
Morga n Ave
Howa rd Ave
Boliva r Ave
St
St
St
Layto n Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH32
Land Use Map : KK-7
0
335
670
Feet
1,340

Kinnickinnic River
Portions of two municipalities within Milwaukee County are located within the Cherokee Park
Milwaukee. Nearly 91% of the 1.0 square mile assessment point area is located within the city
of Greenfield. The city of Milwaukee occupies the remaining 9%. The extent of the civil
divisions within the area is presented in TABLE 4-73.
TABLE 4-73
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK

City of Greenfield
0.9
90.86%
City of Milwaukee
0.1
9.14%
Total
1.0
100.00%
Civil Division

focus in Cherokee Park Creek are FC and DO. The largest contributor to Baseline loads is
commercial land use. It is important to recognize that land uses directly impact pollutant
loading, which in turn, directly affects water quality.
land uses within the Cherokee Park Creek assessment point area (KK-7). These sources may be
presented in Appendix 4C. Based on detailed water quality modeling analyses, FC
concentrations were assessed as moderate for the annual measure and good for the swimming
season measure. See Figure 4-33, Figure 4-34, and Figure 4-35 for FC data as a function of days
per year, FC data as a function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow,
Dissolved oxygen was also analyzed in detail. The minimum DO concentrations were assessed
as poor during the warm weather months. During the same time period, the maximum DO
concentrations were characterized as very good (see habitat section for details on the interactions
of DO, water temperature, and aquatic habitat). The DO concentrations within the Cherokee
Park Creek assessment point area (KK-7) exhibit considerable variability, particularly during the
spring months. This variability could be explained by the excessive growth of attached algae or
inputs of BOD. The decline in DO concentrations during the summer months is typical and is
likely due to the decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water. However, the decline during
4-121
Kinnickinnic River
the summer months is greater than would normally be expected. During these months, the
concentrations of DO fall below the water quality standard more than 75% of the time.
In addition to the parameters of concern, detailed assessments of TP and TSS were also
performed. The concentrations of TP were characterized as good. The concentrations of TP
tend to be greatest at high flows, with concentrations exceeding the 0.1 mg/l planning guideline
nearly 50% of the time during high flows. This suggests that nonpoint source loads of TP are
present within the Cherokee Park Creek assessment point area (KK-7). Total suspended solids
concentrations were characterized as very good. The data indicate that suspended solids are
primarily attributed to nonpoint sources. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled
water quality under Baseline conditions.
In addition to the detailed assessments described above, the modeled Baseline water quality data,
standards.
4-122
Kinnickinnic River @ Cherokee Park Creek (RI 19)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-33

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-34
KK-7 MONTHLY FECAL

Cherokee Park Creek Reach 019

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-35

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-74
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-7
Cherokee Park
Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
4,715

75
453

47
2,187

87
337

19
Mean (mg/l)
7.3
Median (mg/l)
6.5

71
Mean (mg/l)
0.054
Median (mg/l)
0.033

Total Nitrogen
Baseline
Condition
88
Mean (mg/l)
0.67
Median (mg/l)
0.59
Mean (mg/l)
7.7
Median (mg/l)
5.0
Mean (mg/l)
0.0036
Median (mg/l)
0.0012
4-126
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-75
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-7) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
Loads
Units
TP
pounds
140.17
--
--
1.32
0.33
--
222.21
0.02
3.46
--
29.74
36.18
8.90
1.63
--
--
--
TSS
tons
58.81
--
--
0.23
0.15
--
12.23
0.00
2.31
--
10.12
21.23
3.34
0.07
--
--
--
BOD
pounds
6,295
--
--
84
29
--
2,542
221
--
998
1,552
342
56
--
--
--
FC
billion counts
78,076
--
--
755
--
10,412
972
--
32,803
12,572
9,433
--
--
--

* = Impervious surface - unknown source loads added to these land uses.
land.
TABLE 4-76
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-7) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
32%
--
--
0%
0%
--
50%
0%
1%
--
7%
8%
2%
0%
--
--
--
TSS
54%
--
--
0%
0%
--
11%
0%
2%
--
9%
20%
3%
0%
--
--
--
BOD
52%
--
--
1%
0%
--
21%
0%
2%
--
8%
13%
3%
0%
--
--
--
FC
54%
--
--
0%
1%
--
7%
0%
1%
--
23%
9%
7%
0%
--
--
--
Loads
4-127
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-77
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-7) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
tons/acre
0.23
0.10
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
0.36
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
---
0.05
0.02
0.06
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
---
---
---
BOD
pounds/acre
10.24
--
--
0.14
0.05
--
4.14
0.00
0.36
--
1.62
2.52
0.56
0.09
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
127
--
--
--
17
--
53
20
15
--
--
--
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS

4-128
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Cherokee Park Creek assessment point area (KK-7) was evaluated.
flow. In this area, the flashiness was assessed as poor. This assessment of flashiness suggests
that this reach experiences rapid increases and decreases in stream flow, which has the potential
to disturb aquatic life and habitat. The Cherokee Park Creek assessment point area does not
contain an assessed plant community. Dissolved oxygen is another key factor affecting habitat
suitability. Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life. Maintaining sufficient
DO concentrations throughout the year is an important component of aquatic habitat. However,
warm weather months. The minimum DO concentrations were assessed as poor during the warm
weather months. During the same time period, the maximum DO concentrations were
characterized as very good. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled flashiness
and water quality parameters affecting habitat under Baseline conditions.
reduction in Baseline FC loads and a 15% reduction in Baseline BOD loads within the Cherokee
Park Creek assessment point area (KK-7). The major reason for the reduction in Baseline FC
loads is the projection in the RWQMPU that 33% of the unknown FC source loads will be
eliminated. The assumption made in the RWQMPU (Planning Report No. 50, Chapter 10) was
that 33% of the unknown sources would be identified and eliminated by the year 2020. The 33%
was determined based on professional judgment, considering the challenges and expense of
finding and fixing the sources.
Modeled Year 2020 water quality within this assessment point area is presented in TABLE 4-78.
This table also reflects compliance with applicable water quality standards within the assessment
standards while the detailed assessments are focused on habitat and do not consider water quality
special variance standards.
Notwithstanding the 44% reduction in FC loading and the 15% reduction in BOD loading, water
moderate for the annual measure and would deteriorate from good to moderate during the
swimming season. The assessment of the minimum concentration of DO would remain poor and
the assessment of the maximum concentration of DO would remain very good. The assessment
of TP would remain good and TSS would remain unchanged as very good. The preceding Year
2020 water quality assessments are focused on habitat suitability and may not match the
standards. Modeling of the Year 2020 condition indicates that the assessment of flashiness
4-129
Kinnickinnic River
within the Cherokee Park Creek assessment point area would remain unchanged as poor. See
conditions.
TABLE 4-78
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK
ASSESSMENTPOINT AREA (KK-7)
Assessment
Point
KK-7
Cherokee Park
Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
75
265

137
1,260

85
203

66
Mean (mg/l)
7.3
Median (mg/l)
6.7

standard (>5 mg/l)
71
Mean (mg/l)
0.049
Median (mg/l)
0.031
89
Mean (mg/l)
0.61
Median (mg/l)
0.53
Mean (mg/l)
6.7
Median (mg/l)
Copper
2,632


Total Nitrogen
Year 2020
Condition
4.0
Mean (mg/l)
0.0030
Median (mg/l)
0.0010
4-130
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-79
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-7) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Industrial*
Wetland
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
lbs
119.37
--
--
1.17
0.65
--
176.95
0.02
5.41
--
27.49
32.01
8.28
0.99
--
--
--
TSS
tons
44.44
--
--
0.21
0.27
--
9.68
0.00
3.25
--
8.29
16.90
2.75
0.04
--
--
--
BOD
pounds
5,174
--
--
75
53
--
2,152
331
--
906
1,318
310
34
--
--
--
FC
billion counts
41,924
--
--
917
--
5,847
968
--
18,836
7,086
5,455
--
--
--

impervious land.
TABLE 4-80
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-7) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
32%
--
--
0%
0%
--
48%
0%
1%
--
7%
9%
2%
0%
--
--
--
TSS
52%
--
--
0%
0%
--
11%
0%
4%
--
10%
20%
3%
0%
--
--
--
BOD
50%
--
--
1%
1%
--
21%
0%
3%
--
9%
13%
3%
0%
--
--
--
FC
52%
--
--
0%
1%
--
7%
0%
1%
--
23%
9%
7%
0%
--
--
--
Loads
4-131
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-81
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE CHEROKEE PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-7) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.19
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.29
0.00
0.01
--
0.04
0.05
0.01
0.00
--
--
--
TSS
tons/acre
0.07
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.02
0.00
0.01
--
0.01
0.03
0.00
0.00
--
--
--
BOD
pounds/acre
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
68
--
--
--
10
--
31
12
--
--
--

4-132
Kinnickinnic River
4.5.8 Wilson Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-8)

This portion of the Wilson Park Creek is located in the central portion of the Kinnickinnic River
watershed. This tributary flows northwesterly and includes the downstream portion of Villa
Mann Creek and tributary area. The Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8)
encompasses 3.8 square miles and begins at the downstream end of the Wilson Park Creek
assessment point area (KK-4). The beginning point is located approximately 500 feet northwest
of the intersection of Layton and Howell Avenues. From this point, within a concrete-lined
channel, the creek flows westerly toward 5th Street and then changes direction and flows
northwesterly toward the intersection of Armour Avenue and 6th Street. On the west side of 6th
Street, a natural channel replaces the concrete-lined channel. The creek continues to flow
northwesterly towards the point where I-94/I-43 passess over 13th Street. About 600 feet
southeast of that point, the creek re-enters a concrete-lined channel and flows under the interstate
and 13th Street and re-enters a natural channel west of 13th Street, north of Bolivar Avenue. The
creek continues to flow northwesterly into Wilson Park to its confluence with Villa Mann Creek
on the west side of the park. From this point, the creek changes direction and flows northerly
and then westerly past the Wilson Recreation Center towards the northwestern corner of Wilson
Park. The creek enters a concrete-lined channel west of 20th Street. From the northwestern
corner of the park, the creek flows northerly within a concrete-lined channel beneath Howard
Avenue toward the Point Loomis Shopping Center. South of the commercial area, the creek
enters enclosed conduit and flows beneath the shopping center and emerges east of Curtin
Elementary School. The creek then flows northerly within a concrete-lined channel to Euclid
Avenue where it enters enclosed conduit and flows along the west side of Saint Lukes Medical
Center to its confluence with the Kinnickinnic River mainstem (Figure 4-36).
In addition to the places noted above, the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8) also
contains Mount Olivet Cemetery, the eastern third of Arlingon Cemetery, a portion of St.
Adalberts Cemetery, the southeastern quarter of Alverno College and the Second Home
Cemetery. The Wilson Park Creek assessment point area does not contain any dams or drop
structures. The riparian width exceeds 75 feet along about 10% of the creek in this assessment
point area.
The land use within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8) is predominantly
transportation (34%), including highways, local roads, and arterial streets. High-density
residential (23%) and low-density residential (12%) also contribute to the total land use (these
are defined in the following table). Wilson Park contributes to recreation, natural areas, and
open space land use and makes up nearly 15% of the total land use. Institutional and
governmental, along with commercial, and manufacturing and industrial land uses compose the
remaining 16%. Based on an analysis of land use information used to develop the water quality
data, approximately 31% of the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area is impervious. TABLE
4-82 presents the land uses within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area.
4-133
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-82
LAND USE IN THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8)

0.0
0.00%
0.5
12.39%
0.9
23.32%
Commercial
0.1
3.98%
0.3
9.32%

0.6
14.74%
Transportation
1.3
33.57%
0.1
2.68%
Total
3.8
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
2
4-134
t
es
e
Av
Oklahoma Ave
Cleme nt Ave
Chase Ave
6th St
h St
13th St
St
20th St
h St
St
St
35th St
27th St
KK-8
43rd St
r
Fo
m
Ho
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH36
Land Use Map : KK-8
0
385
770
Feet
1,540

Kinnickinnic River
Portions of two municipalities within Milwaukee County are located within the Wilson Park
Milwaukee. Nearly 94% of the 3.8 square mile area is located within the city of Milwaukee.
The city of Greenfield occupies the remaining 6%. The extent of the civil divisions within the
area is presented in TABLE 4-83.
TABLE 4-83
CIVIL DIVISIONS IN THE WILSON PARK CREEK

City of Greenfield
0.2
5.70%
City of Milwaukee
3.6
94.30%
Total
3.8
100.00%
Civil Division

focus within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8) are TP and FC. The largest
contributors to Baseline loads are commercial land uses for FC and BOD and grass on
hydrologic group C soils for TP. It is important to recognize that land uses directly impact
pollutant loading, which in turn, directly affects water quality.
land uses within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8). These sources may be
Figure 4-37, Figure 4-38, and Figure 4-39 for FC data as a function of days per year, FC data as
a function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow, respectively. Note:
the black line on Figure 4-37 represents the cumulative number of days at various concentrations
The concentrations of TP were characterized as moderate. They are more consistent and
generally lower during the late spring, summer, and early fall. This may be related in part to
uptake by plants during the growing season. During the winter months, the concentration of TP
increases; this could be related to de-icing activities at the airport. De-icing chemicals contain
phosphorus that serve as corrosion inhibitors.
4-136
Kinnickinnic River
data. The minimum and maximum DO concentrations were assessed as very good during the
warm weather months (see habitat section for details on the interactions of DO, water
temperature, and aquatic habitat).
The TSS concentrations were characterized as very good. The data indicate that suspended
solids are primarily attributed to nonpoint sources. The potential sources of suspended solids
include runoff that carries a sediment load, stream bank erosion, or re-suspended stream
sediments. However, note that the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8) contains
concrete-lined and / or enclosed reaches. As a result, re-suspension of stream sediments and
erosion likely make less of a contribution to TSS than natural reaches that experience these
processes. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality under Baseline
conditions.
In addition to the detailed assessments described above, the modeled Baseline water quality data,
standards.
presents the annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis. The cumulative loads, including loads
from the assessment point areas KK-4, KK-5, KK-6, and KK-7 are also estimated within the
Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8). TABLE 4-88 presents the cumulative annual
pollutant loads, TABLE 4-89 presents the percentage breakdown for each cumulative load, and
TABLE 4-90 presents the cumulative annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis.
4-137
Kinnickinnic River @ Wilson park Creek, USGS Gage (RI 818)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-37

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-38
KK-8 MONTHLY FECAL

Wilson Park Creek (USGS Gage) Reach 818

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-39

Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-84
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK
Assessment
Point
KK-8
Wilson Park
Creek, USGS
Gauge
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
56
697

35
2,552

73
357

26
Mean (mg/l)
10.9
Median (mg/l)
11.2

100
Mean (mg/l)
0.116
Median (mg/l)
0.055
77
Mean (mg/l)
0.96
Median (mg/l)
0.7
Mean (mg/l)
14.1
Median (mg/l)
Copper
5,124


Total Nitrogen
Baseline
Condition
4.8
Mean (mg/l)
0.0044
Median (mg/l)
0.0018
4-141
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-85
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Transportation*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential*
Ultra Low*
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
579.21
--
--
3.34
9.73
1.40
828.40
1.89
44.01
--
113.44
115.47
20.83
8.98
--
--
--
TSS
tons
252.75
--
--
0.53
4.55
0.05
38.00
0.08
32.27
--
38.91
68.97
7.83
0.33
--
--
--
BOD
pounds
26,011
--
--
206
832
19
9,284
20
2,807
--
3,808
4,950
801
309
--
--
--
FC
billion counts
322,375
--
--
23
21,940
29
39,947
110
12,335
--
124,694
40,051
22,075
18
--
--
--

land.
TABLE 4-86
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
34%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
48%
0%
3%
--
7%
7%
1%
1%
--
--
--
TSS
57%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
9%
0%
7%
--
9%
16%
2%
0%
--
--
--
BOD
53%
--
--
0%
2%
0%
19%
0%
6%
--
8%
10%
2%
1%
--
--
--
FC
55%
--
--
0%
4%
0%
7%
0%
2%
--
21%
7%
4%
0%
--
--
--
Loads
4-142
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-87
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TSS
tons/acre
0.27
0.12
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.38
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.02
0.01
---
0.05
0.02
0.05
0.03
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
---
---
BOD
pounds/acre
11.94
--
--
0.09
0.38
0.01
4.26
0.01
1.29
--
1.75
2.27
0.37
0.14
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
148
--
--
10
18
--
57
18
10
--
--
--
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre

TABLE 4-88
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government / Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
1798.45
6.46
2.63
9.84
30.33
91.35
2695.35
2.19
292.24
0.08
288.33
335.59
32.20
36.87
762.29
--
14.77
TSS
tons
802.11
7.32
3.01
1.47
14.28
3.07
112.13
0.09
217.15
0.02
99.44
200.07
12.11
1.27
3.55
--
0.42
BOD
pounds
80,764
290
114
594
2,593
1,258
29,915
23
18,637
9,680
98,167
1,239
1,271
6,753.51
--
208.17
FC
billion counts
1,000,525
49
34
67
68,342
1,912
131,683
127
81,891
316,208
116,421
34,123
74
--
16,143
Loads
Units

4-143
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-89
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
28%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
42%
0%
5%
0%
5%
5%
1%
1%
12%
--
0%
TSS
54%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
8%
0%
15%
0%
7%
14%
1%
0%
0%
--
0%
BOD
32%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
12%
0%
7%
0%
4%
39%
0%
1%
3%
--
0%
FC
57%
0%
0%
0%
4%
0%
7%
0%
5%
0%
18%
7%
2%
0%
0%
--
1%
Loads
TABLE 4-90
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
0.256
0.001
0.000
0.001
0.004
0.013
0.384
0.000
0.042
0.000
0.041
0.048
0.005
0.005
0.108
--
0.002
TSS
tons/acre
0.114
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.016
0.000
0.031
0.000
0.014
0.028
0.002
0.000
0.001
--
0.000
BOD
pounds/acre
11.493
0.041
0.016
0.085
0.369
0.179
4.257
0.003
2.652
0.001
1.377
13.969
0.176
0.181
0.961
--
0.030
FC
billion counts/acre
142.374
0.007
0.005
0.010
9.725
0.272
18.738
0.018
11.653
0.001
44.996
16.567
4.856
0.011
0.000
--
2.297
4-144
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8) was evaluated. The
disturb aquatic life and habitat. There are two assessed plant communities within the Wilson
Park Creek assessment point area. Both of these plant communities were assessed as poor. It is
important to note that despite their quality assessment ratings, all plant communities provide
necessary habitat for a variety of wildlife. Dissolved oxygen is another key factor affecting
habitat suitability. Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life. Maintaining
sufficient DO concentrations throughout the year is an important component of aquatic habitat.
However, excessive DO concentrations (greater than 15 mg/l) can also harm aquatic life,
especially during warm weather months. The minimum and maximum DO concentrations were
assessed as very good during the warm weather months. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more
detail on modeled flashiness and water quality parameters affecting habitat under Baseline
conditions.
Baseline BOD loads within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8). The major
Modeled Year 2020 water quality within this assessment point area is presented in TABLE 4-91.
pollutant loads within the Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8), TABLE 4-96
presents the Year 2020 percentage breakdown for each cumulative load, and TABLE 4-97
presents the Year 2020 cumulative annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis.
that the assessment of FC would remain poor for the annual measure, but improve from poor to
moderate during the swimming season. The assessments of the minimum and maximum DO
4-145
Kinnickinnic River
concentrations would remain very good. The assessment of TP would remain moderate and the
assessment of TSS would remain unchanged as very good. The preceding Year 2020 water
Wilson Park Creek assessment point area (KK-8) would remain unchanged as poor. See Chapter
6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality and flashiness under Year 2020
conditions.
TABLE 4-91
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK
Assessment
Point
Water Quality
Indicator
KK-8
Wilson Park Creek,
(annual)
USGS Gauge

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
2,794

63
386

99
1,315

79
189

63
Mean (mg/l)
10.9
Median (mg/l)
11.2

standard (>5 mg/l)
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.110
Median (mg/l)
0.053

Total Nitrogen
Year 2020 Condition
79
Mean (mg/l)
0.91
Median (mg/l)
0.63
Mean (mg/l)
11.3
Median (mg/l)
3.7
Mean (mg/l)
0.0037
Median (mg/l)
0.0015
4-146
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-92
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Pasture(B)
Wetland
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
516.47
--
--
3.08
8.65
1.08
647.48
1.57
37.75
--
98.18
100.00
18.69
7.85
--
--
--
TSS
tons
199.65
--
--
0.49
3.57
0.03
29.22
0.06
24.54
--
29.89
52.65
6.26
0.29
--
--
--
BOD
pounds
22,232
--
--
190
703
16
7,676
18
2,296
--
3,183
4,085
694
270
--
--
--
FC
billion counts
176,667
--
--
21
11,805
16
21,859
64
6,286
--
66,440
20,501
12,408
16
--
--
--

impervious land.
TABLE 4-93
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
36%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
45%
0%
3%
--
7%
7%
1%
1%
--
--
--
TSS
58%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
8%
0%
7%
--
9%
15%
2%
0%
--
--
--
BOD
54%
--
--
0%
2%
0%
19%
0%
6%
--
8%
10%
2%
1%
--
--
--
FC
56%
--
--
0%
4%
0%
7%
0%
2%
--
21%
6%
4%
0%
--
--
--
Loads
4-147
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-94
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.24
--
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.00
0.02
--
0.05
0.05
0.01
0.00
--
--
--
TSS
tons/acre
0.09
--
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
0.01
--
0.01
0.02
0.00
0.00
--
--
--
BOD
pounds/acre
10
--
--
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
81
--
--
10
--
31
--
--
--

TABLE 4-95
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS / YEAR)
274.24
--
258.27
291.46
28.95
SSOs
1.78
CSOs
2,080.81
Industrial
71.92
Wetland
28.98
Ultra Low
8.13
Transportation
--
Residential
--
Pasture(B)
Government /
Institution
1,637.95
Industrial
Forest
pounds
Grass(D)
Crop(C)
Units
TP
Grass(C)
Crop(B)
Loads
Point sources
Grass(B)
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
29.51
762.29
--
3.21
TSS
tons
636.74
--
--
1.23
11.57
2.33
84.56
0.07
179.71
--
77.87
153.49
9.66
1.01
3.55
--
0.09
BOD
pounds
70,778
--
--
492
2,298
1,040
24,366
19
16,669
--
8,520
95,696
1,079
1,017
6,754
--
45
FC
billion count
557,126
--
--
55
36,966
1,046
70,949
73
46,718
--
171,439
62,274
19,111
60
--
3,511

4-148
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-96
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
30%
--
--
0%
1%
1%
38%
0%
5%
--
5%
5%
1%
1%
14%
--
0%
TSS
tons
55%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
7%
0%
15%
--
7%
13%
1%
0%
0%
--
0%
BOD
pounds
31%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
11%
0%
7%
--
4%
42%
0%
0%
3%
--
0%
FC
billion count
57%
--
--
0%
4%
0%
7%
0%
5%
--
18%
6%
2%
0%
0%
--
0%
TABLE 4-97
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE WILSON PARK CREEK ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-8) (UNITS /ACRE / YEAR)
0.296
0.000
0.039
--
SSOs
Pasture(B)
0.010
CSOs
Industrial
0.004
Industrial
Grass(D)
0.001
Wetland
Grass(C)
--
Ultra Low
Grass(B)
--
Transportation
Government /
Institution
0.233
Residential
Forest
pounds/acre
Crop(C)
Units
TP
Crop(B)
Loads
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
0.037
0.041
0.004
0.004
0.108
--
0.000
TSS
tons/acre
0.091
--
--
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.012
0.000
0.026
--
0.011
0.022
0.001
0.000
0.001
--
0.000
BOD
pounds/acre
10.072
--
--
0.070
0.327
0.148
3.467
0.003
2.372
--
1.212
13.617
0.154
0.145
0.961
--
0.006
FC
billion counts/acre
79.279
--
--
0.008
5.260
0.149
10.096
0.010
6.648
--
24.396
8.862
2.719
0.008
0.000
--
0.500
4-149
Kinnickinnic River
4.5.9 Kinnickinnic River Mainstem (Assessment Points KK-9 and KK-10)

This portion of the mainstem is located in the northern portion of the Kinnickinnic River
watershed and flows easterly to the Lake Michigan estuary. The Kinnickinnic River mainstem
assessment point areas KK-9 and KK-10 encompass 3.3 square miles. Within the Kinnickinnic
River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9), the river begins on the west side of St. Lukes
Hospital, immediately downstream of its confluence with Wilson Park Creek. From there, the
river flows easterly through the Kinnickinnic River Parkway, beneath 27th Street and then south
of the Forest Home Cemetery and the north of Pulaski High School. East of 20th Street and the
Kinnickinnic Sports Center, the river changes direction and flows northerly along 16th Street.
The river continues to flow northerly until it reaches Pulaski Park. In the center of the park, the
river changes direction and begins to flow easterly. On the east side of the park, the river reaches
the downstream terminus of the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9) and
the point where the river flows into the combined sewer service area. Throughout the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9), the river flows within a concretelined channel. Despite being confined to a concrete-lined channel, the width of the riparian area
varies substantially, from less than 25 feet to greater than 75 feet.
The relatively wide riparian width is likely due to the types of land uses the river flows through.
These land uses include recreational and open space land uses associated with Pulaski High
School and the Kinnickinnic Sports Center located northeast of intersection of Oklahoma
Avenue and 20th Street (Figure 4-40). The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area
(KK-9) does not contain any dams or drop structures.
Beyond the land uses adjacent to the river, the land use within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem
assessment point area (KK-9) is predominantly institutional and governmental (28%), which is
largly due to the Forest Home Cemetery, Saint Francis Hospital and St. Lukes Hospital. Highdensity residential (25%) (this is defined on the following table) and transportation (24%) also
contribute to the total land use. Land adjacent to the river corridor contributes to recreation,
natural areas, and open space land uses, which make up nearly 15% of the total land use.
Manufacturing and industrial land uses, along with commercial land uses compose the remaining
approximately 27% of the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9) is
impervious. TABLE 4-98 presents the land uses within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem
assessment point area (KK-9).
4-150
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-98

ASSESSMENT POINT AREA KK-9

0.0
0.00%
0.0
0.00%
0.3
24.66%
Commercial
0.0
2.32%
0.3
28.19%

0.2
14.98%
Transportation
0.3
24.28%
0.1
5.57%
Total
1.2
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
2
4-151
43rd St
Linco ln Ave
Cleve land Ave
KK-9
e
Av
Chase Ave
6th St
13th St
20th St
Oklahoma Ave
35th St
H
st
43rd St
re
Fo
om
Morga n Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH40
Land Use Map : KK-9
0
285
570
Feet
1,140

Kinnickinnic River
The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9) is occupied by one
municipality. The city of Milwaukee occupies the entire 1.2 square mile area, as shown in
TABLE 4-99.
TABLE 4-99

City of Milwaukee
1.2
100.00%
Total
1.2
100.00%
Civil Division

focus within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9) are TP and FC. The
largest contributors to Baseline loads are SSOs. It is important to recognize that land uses
land uses in the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9). These sources may
be caused by illicit connections to the storm sewer system, leaking sewers, or other unidentified
Appendix 4C. Based on detailed water quality modeling analyses, FC concentrations were
assessed as poor for the annual measure and moderate during the swimming season. See Figure
4-41, Figure 4-42, and Figure 4-43 for FC data as a function of days per year, FC data as a
function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow, respectively. Note: the
black line on Figure 4-41 represents the cumulative number of days at various concentrations
Total phosphorus was also analyzed in detail. The concentrations of TP were characterized as
poor within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9). They tended to be
highest during high and low flows. The higher concentrations at flow extremes suggest a
background source of TP that is particularly noticeable at low flows (perhaps due to inputs of
non-contact cooling water) as well as nonpoint sources of phosphorus at high flows.
data. The minimum and maximum DO concentrations were both assessed as very good during
the warm weather months (see habitat section for details on the interactions of DO, water
temperature, and aquatic habitat). The concentrations of DO are consistently high within the
4-153
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9). The decline in DO concentrations
during the summer months is typical and a function of decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer
water.
Total suspended solids concentrations were also characterized as very good. The data indicate
that suspended solids are primarily attributed to nonpoint sources. The potential sources of
suspended solids include runoff that carries a sediment load, stream bank erosion, or resuspended stream sediments. However, note that the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment
point area (KK-9) contains concrete-lined and / or enclosed reaches. As a result, re-suspension
of stream sediments and erosion likely make less of a contribution to TSS than natural reaches
that experience these processes.
While chlorides were not modeled with the water quality model, chlorides were characterized
with water sample data. These samples show chloride values that fall below levels that are
acutely toxic to fish and invertebrates. Concentrations in March consistently exceed the chronic
toxicity threshold. However, a common source of chloride is road salt and there are no winter
data. Winter chloride concentrations would be expected to exceed Marchs chloride
concentrations. It is difficult to assess chloride without data from the winter months; however, it
appears that when chloride is not being actively applied, some amount is in a reservoir
(sediment) that is gradually released and is particularly noticeable during mid-to-dry conditions.
As flow increases, the concentrations decline due to dilution (Figure 4-44). See Chapter 6,
Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality under Baseline conditions.
In addition to the detailed analyses described above, the modeled Baseline water quality data,
standards.
pollutant loads, TABLE 4-102 presents the percentage breakdown for each load, and TABLE 4103 presents the annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis. The cumulative loads, including
loads from assessment point areas KK-1 through KK-9, are also estimated within the
Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9). TABLE 4-104 presents the
cumulative annual pollutant loads, TABLE 4-105 presents the percentage breakdown for each
cumulative load, and TABLE 4-106 presents the cumulative annual pollutant loads on a per acre
basis.
4-154
Kinnickinnic River @ South 27th Street (RI 12)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-41

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-42
KK-9 MONTHLY FECAL

South 27th Street (RI-12) Reach 807

Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-43


Chloride
Flow Conditions
Acute Toxicity (757 mg/L)
Chronic Toxicity (395 mg/L)
Box & Whiskers
C onc e ntra tion (m g/L)
1000
100
10
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data; Chloride Field Data

FIGURE 4-44
KK-9 FLOW BASED CHLORIDE

CONCENTRATIONS
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-100
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER
Assessment
Point
Water Quality
Indicator
KK-9
Kinnickinnic River
(annual)
Downstream of
Wilson Park
Creek

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Copper
5,785

74
654

254
3,360

87
343

146
Mean (mg/l)
11.3
Median (mg/l)
11.4

100
Mean (mg/l)
0.206
Median (mg/l)
0.171

Total Nitrogen
Baseline
Condition
24
Mean (mg/l)
1.39
Median (mg/l)
1.22
Mean (mg/l)
14.5
Median (mg/l)
4.8
Mean (mg/l)
0.0047
Median (mg/l)
0.0019
4-159
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-101
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT (KK-9) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
172.78
--
--
1.26
8.50
--
281.59
--
30.60
--
32.53
--
12.00
1.68
222.80
56.04
876.49
TSS
tons
72.49
--
--
0.22
3.93
--
15.50
--
20.42
--
11.08
--
4.50
0.07
0.45
2.45
25.10
BOD
pounds
7,759
--
--
80
726
--
3,222
--
1,951
--
1,092
--
462
57
812.54
788.07
12,350.50
FC
billion counts
96,243
--
--
19,172
--
13,195
--
8,588
--
35,883
--
12,718
63,549
957,778
Loads
Units

land.
TABLE 4-102
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT (KK-9) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
TP
TSS
BOD
FC
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
10%
46%
26%
8%
-----
-----
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
3%
2%
2%
-----
17%
10%
11%
1%
-----
2%
13%
7%
1%
-----
2%
7%
4%
3%
-----
1%
3%
2%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
13%
0%
3%
0%
3%
2%
3%
5%
52%
16%
42%
79%
4-160
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-103
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT (KK-9) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
tons/acre
0.23
0.09
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.01
---
0.37
0.02
---
0.04
0.03
---
0.04
0.01
---
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.29
0.00
0.07
0.00
1.14
0.03
BOD
pounds/acre
10.13
--
--
0.10
0.95
--
4.21
--
2.55
--
1.43
--
0.60
0.08
1.06
1.03
16.13
FC
billion counts/acre
126
--
--
25
--
17
--
11
--
47
--
17
0.00
83
1,251
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS

TABLE 4-104
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT (KK-9) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
Loads
Units
TP
pounds
2,975.60
6.46
2.63
15.13
64.09
91.35
4,213.03
2.40
466.14
0.08
603.16
337.11
61.17
48.45
1,441.15
56.04
894.57
TSS
tons
1,295.98
7.32
3.01
2.40
29.89
3.07
195.68
0.10
333.20
0.02
206.61
200.96
22.97
1.75
5.55
2.45
25.62
BOD
pounds
133,627
290
114
931
5,478
1,258
47,280
25
29,726
20,249
98,233
2,353
1,667
12,990.78
788.07
12,605.32
FC
billion counts
1,656,206
49
34
105
144,515
1,912
202,797
139
130,696
663,443
116,950
64,820
98
0.00
63,549
977,539

4-161
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-105
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT (KK-9) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
26%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
37%
0%
4%
0%
5%
3%
1%
0%
13%
0%
8%
TSS
55%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
8%
0%
14%
0%
9%
9%
1%
0%
0%
0%
1%
BOD
36%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
13%
0%
8%
0%
6%
27%
1%
0%
4%
0%
3%
FC
41%
0%
0%
0%
4%
0%
5%
0%
3%
0%
16%
3%
2%
0%
0%
2%
24%
Loads
TABLE 4-106
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT (KK-9) (UNITS /ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.261
0.001
0.000
0.001
0.006
0.008
0.369
0.000
0.041
0.000
0.053
0.030
0.005
0.004
0.126
0.005
0.078
TSS
tons/acre
0.114
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.000
0.017
0.000
0.029
0.000
0.018
0.018
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.002
BOD
pounds/acre
11.703
0.025
0.010
0.082
0.480
0.110
4.141
0.002
2.603
0.001
1.773
8.603
0.206
0.146
1.138
0.069
1.104
FC
billion counts/acre
145.051
0.004
0.003
0.009
12.657
0.167
17.761
0.012
11.446
0.000
58.104
10.242
5.677
0.009
0.000
5.566
85.613
Loads
Units
4-162
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area was evaluated.
flow. Within this area, the flashiness was characterized as poor. This assessment of flashiness
potential to disturb aquatic life and habitat. The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point
area (KK-9) does not contain any assessed plant communities. Dissolved oxygen is another key
factor affecting habitat suitability. Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life.
Maintaining sufficient DO concentrations throughout the year is an important component of
aquatic habitat. However, excessive DO concentrations (greater than 15 mg/l) can also harm
aquatic life, especially during warm weather months. The minimum and maximum DO
concentrations were both assessed as very good during the warm weather months. See Chapter
6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled flashiness and water quality parameters affecting
habitat under Baseline conditions.
reduction in Baseline TP loads and a 78% reduction in Baseline FC loads within the
Kinnickinnic River assessment point area (KK-9). The major reason for the reduction in
Baseline FC loads is the projection in the RWQMPU that 33% of the unknown FC source
loads will be eliminated. The assumption made in the RWQMPU (Planning Report No. 50,
Chapter 10) was that 33% of the unknown sources would be identified and eliminated by the
year 2020. The 33% was determined based on professional judgment, considering the challenges
and expense of finding and fixing the sources.
Modeled Year 2020 water quality within this assessment point area is presented TABLE 4-107.
pollutant loads, TABLE 4-112 presents the Year 2020 percentage breakdown for each
cumulative load, and TABLE 4-113 presents the Year 2020 cumulative annual pollutant loads on
a per acre basis.
Notwithstanding the 78% reduction in FC loading and the 51% reduction in TP loading, water
quality modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates that the assessments of TP would remain
poor. Fecal coliform would remain poor for the annual measure and would remain moderate
during the swimming season. The assessments of TSS would remain unchanged as very good as
would the assessments of minimum and maximum concentrations of DO. The preceding Year
4-163
Kinnickinnic River
standards. Modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicates that the assessment of flashiness
within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-9) would remain unchanged
as poor. See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled water quality and flashiness
under Year 2020 conditions.
TABLE 4-107
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER
ASSESSMENTPOINT AREA (KK-9)
Assessment
Point
KK-9
Kinnickinnic River
Downstream of
Wilson Park Creek
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Year 2020 Condition

78
363

297
Copper
1,579

89
184

153
Mean (mg/l)
11.3
Median (mg/l)
11.4

standard (>2 mg/l)a
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.195
Median (mg/l)
0.162

Total Nitrogen
3,028
25
Mean (mg/l)
1.29
Median (mg/l)
1.12
Mean (mg/l)
11.7
Median (mg/l)
3.8
Mean (mg/l)
0.0040
Median (mg/l)
0.0017
4-164
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-108
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-9) (UNITS / ACRE)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
Loads
Units
TP
pounds
152.88
--
--
1.31
7.52
--
226.07
--
21.23
--
27.35
--
10.62
1.90
222.80
27.48
124.87
TSS
tons
57.71
--
--
0.23
3.13
--
12.37
--
12.75
--
8.38
--
3.58
0.08
0.45
1.20
3.58
BOD
pounds
6,592
--
--
83
617
--
2,750
--
1,300
--
882
--
392
65
813
386
1,760
FC
billion counts
54,255
--
--
10,808
--
7,470
--
3,796
--
19,218
--
7,169
31,156
136,455

impervious land.
TABLE 4-109
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-9) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
19%
--
--
0%
1%
--
27%
--
3%
--
3%
--
1%
0%
27%
3%
15%
TSS
56%
--
--
0%
3%
--
12%
--
12%
--
8%
--
3%
0%
0%
1%
3%
BOD
42%
--
--
1%
4%
--
18%
--
8%
--
6%
--
3%
0%
5%
2%
11%
FC
20%
--
--
0%
4%
--
3%
--
1%
--
7%
--
3%
0%
0%
12%
50%
Loads
4-165
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-110
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-9) (UNITS / ACRE /YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
Units
Transportation
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.20
--
--
0.00
0.01
--
0.30
--
0.03
--
0.04
--
0.01
0.00
0.29
0.04
0.16
TSS
tons/acre
0.08
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.02
--
0.02
--
0.01
--
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
--
--
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
71
--
--
14
--
10
--
--
25
--
41
178

TABLE 4-111
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-9) (UNITS / YEAR)
1.95
407.30
--
532.97
291.46
54.64
SSOs
3,299.58
CSOs
71.92
Industrial
Ultra Low
56.96
Wetland
Transportation
13.16
Residential
--
Pasture(B)
--
Industrial
2,676.11
Grass(D)
Forest
pounds
Grass(C)
Crop(C)
Units
TP
Grass(B)
Crop(B)
Loads
Point Sources
Government /
Institution
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
39.99
1,441.15
27.48
131.40
TSS
tons
1,026.97
--
--
2.11
23.13
2.33
151.22
0.08
259.67
--
161.75
153.49
18.33
1.45
5.55
1.20
3.76
BOD
pounds
115,623
--
--
813
4,584
1,040
39,191
21
24,818
--
17,422
95,696
2,028
1,376
12,991
386
1,852
FC
billion count
924,173
--
--
91
76,767
1,046
111,219
80
70,519
--
363,296
62,274
36,439
81
31,156
143,584

4-166
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-112
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-9) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Transportation
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential
Ultra Low
Loads
Government /
Institution
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
30%
--
--
0%
1%
1%
36%
0%
5%
--
6%
3%
1%
0%
16%
0%
1%
TSS
tons
57%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
8%
0%
14%
--
9%
8%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
BOD
pounds
36%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
12%
0%
8%
--
5%
30%
1%
0%
4%
0%
1%
FC
billion count
51%
--
--
0%
4%
0%
6%
0%
4%
--
20%
3%
2%
0%
0%
2%
8%
TABLE 4-113
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-9) (UNITS / ACRE /YEAR)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
pounds/acre
Crop(C)
Units
TP
Crop(B)
Loads
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
0.234
--
--
0.001
0.005
0.006
0.289
0.000
0.036
--
0.047
0.026
0.005
0.004
0.126
0.002
0.012
0.000
TSS
tons/acre
0.090
--
--
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.013
0.000
0.023
--
0.014
0.013
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.000
BOD
pounds/acre
10.126
--
--
0.071
0.401
0.091
3.432
0.002
2.174
--
1.526
8.381
0.178
0.120
1.138
0.034
0.162
FC
billion counts/acre
80.939
--
--
0.008
6.723
0.092
9.741
0.007
6.176
--
31.817
5.454
3.191
0.007
0.000
2.729
12.575
Cumulative units are weights (or billion counts) per acre per year. A "0" represents a nonzero value less than 0.0005 pounds per acre per year
4-167
Kinnickinnic River
KK-10
The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10) is located downstream of the
combined sewer service area that is located between 16th and 6th Streets, which in turn, is located
downstream of mainstem assessment point area KK-9 (Figure 4-45). Within assessment point
area KK-10, the river begins at 6th Street and flows southeasterly toward I-94/I-43. Just east of
6th Street, the river flows within a concrete-lined channel, but then enters a natural channel west
of 5th Street. Farther downstream and east of I-94/I-43, the river changes direction and flows
northeasterly to Chase Avenue, just south of Baran Park. Chase Avenue marks the downstream
terminus of the Kinnickinnic River mainstem within assessment point area KK-10; farther
downstream, the river flows into the estuary. The width of the riparian margin is relatively
narrow within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10). This
assessment point area does not contain any dams or drop structures.
For the most part, the river flows through industrial, manufacturing, and transportation land uses.
Beyond the land use adjacent to the river, the land use within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem
assessment point area (KK-10) is predominantly high-density residential (37%) (this is defined in
the following table). Transportation, including highway, arterial streets, and local roads
contribute to transportation, which makes up approximately 36% of the total land use.
Recreation, natural areas, and open space land uses and institutional and governmental land uses
make up 18% of the total land use. Manufacturing and industrial, commercial, and low-density
residential land uses compose the remaining 9%. Based on an analysis of land use information
used to develop the water quality data, approximately 33% of the Kinnickinnic River assessment
point area (KK-10) is impervious. TABLE 4-114 presents the land uses within the Kinnickinnic
River assessment point area (KK-10).
4-168
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-114


0.0
0.00%
0.0
0.12%
0.8
37.34%
Commercial
0.1
3.42%
0.2
8.75%

0.2
8.79%
Transportation
0.7
35.54%
0.1
6.04%
Total
2.1
100.00%
Land Use
Agriculture
Notes:
1
2
The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10) assessment point area is
occupied by one municipality. The city of Milwaukee occupies the entire 2.1 square mile area,
as shown in TABLE 4-115.
TABLE 4-115

City of Milwaukee
2.1
100.00%
Total
2.1
100.00%
Civil Division
4-169
KK-10
Cleveland Ave
Clement Ave
13th St
6th St
Chase Ave
Oklahoma Ave
Morgan Ave
Howard Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Land Use
Agriculture
Watersheds
Commercial
Surface Water
Civil Divisions
Water
Waterbodies
)LJXUH45
Land Use Map : KK-10
380
760
Feet
1,520

Kinnickinnic River

focus within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10) are TP and FC.
The largest contributors to Baseline loads are grass on hydrologic group C soils and CSOs (TP),
CSOs (FC), and commercial (BOD). It is important to recognize that land uses directly impact
pollutant loading, which in turn, directly affects water quality.
land uses within the Kinnickinnic River assessment point area (KK-10). These sources may be
4-171
Kinnickinnic River
Figure 4-46, Figure 4-47, and Figure 4-48 for FC data as a function of days per year, FC data as a
function of months of the year, and FC data as a function of stream flow, respectively. Note: the
black line on Figure 4-46 represents the cumulative number of days at various concentrations
The concentrations of TP were characterized as poor within the Kinnickinnic River assessment
point area (KK-10). Concentrations tended to be highest during high and low flows. The higher
concentrations at flow extremes suggest a background source of phosphorus that is particularly
noticeable at low flows (perhaps due to inputs of non-contact cooling water) as well as nonpoint
sources of phosphorus at high flows.
data. The minimum and maximum DO concentrations were assessed as very good during the
warm weather months (see habitat section for details on the interactions of DO, water
temperature, and aquatic habitat). The concentrations of DO are consistently high within the
Kinnickinnic River assessment point area (KK-10). The decline in DO concentrations during the
summer months is typical and a function of decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water. The
TSS concentrations were characterized as very good. The data indicate that suspended solids are
primarily attributed to nonpoint sources.
While chlorides were not modeled with the water quality model, chlorides were characterized
with water sample data. These samples show chloride values below levels that are acutely toxic
to fish and invertebrates. Concentrations in spring often exceed the chronic toxicity threshold.
However, a common source of chloride is road salt and there are no winter data. Winter chloride
concentrations would be expected to exceed Marchs chloride concentrations. It is difficult to
assess chloride without data from the winter months; however, it appears that when chloride is
not being actively applied, some amount is in a reservoir that is gradually released and is
particularly noticeable during mid-to-dry conditions. At high flow conditions, dilution takes
over, lowering the chloride concentration (Figure 4-49). See Chapter 6, Section 6.4 for more
detail on modeled water quality under Baseline conditions.
In addition to the detailed analysis described above, the Baseline water quality data, summarized
on an annual basis, are presented in TABLE 4-116. This table also reflects compliance with
pollutant loads, TABLE 4-118 presents the percentage breakdown for each load, and TABLE 4119 presents the annual pollutant loads on a per acre basis. The cumulative loads, including
loads from assessment point areas KK-1 through KK-10, are also estimated within the
4-172
Kinnickinnic River
Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10). TABLE 4-120 presents the
cumulative annual pollutant loads, TABLE 4-121 presents the percentage breakdown for each
cumulative load, and TABLE 4-122 presents the cumulative annual pollutant loads on a per acre
basis.
4-173
Kinnickinnic River @ South 27th Street (RI 13)

400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
>5000
4000-5000
3000-4000
2000-3000
1000-2000
600-1000
400-600
0-400
FIGURE 4-46

CONCENTRATIONS
FIGURE 4-47
KK-10 MONTHLY FECAL


Fecal Coliform
Flow Conditions
Box & Whiskers
1.E+05
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1.E+04
1.E+03
1.E+02
1.E+01
1.E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data

FIGURE 4-48


Chloride
Flow Conditions
Acute Toxicity (757 mg/L)
Chronic Toxicity (395 mg/L)
Box & Whiskers
C onc e ntra tion (m g/L)
1000
100
10
Mid-range
Flows
Moist
Conditions
High
Flows
Low
Flows
Dry
Conditions
1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Modeled Flow Data; Chloride Field Data

FIGURE 4-49
KK-10 FLOW BASED CHLORIDE

CONCENTRATIONS
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-116
MODELED BASELINE WATER QUALITY FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER

Assessment
Point
Water Quality
Indicator
KK-10
Kinnickinnic River
(annual)
near Upstream
Limit of Estuary

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
74
842

229
3,401

86
498

131
Mean (mg/l)
11.4
Median (mg/l)
11.5

100
Mean (mg/l)
0.196
Median (mg/l)
0.165
27
Mean (mg/l)
1.36
Median (mg/l)
1.21
Mean (mg/l)
13.2
Median (mg/l)
Copper
5,859


Total Nitrogen
Baseline
Condition
4.7
Mean (mg/l)
0.0048
Median (mg/l)
0.0019
4-178
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-117
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / YEAR)
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
TP
pounds
339.48
--
--
1.57
3.78
--
473.44
1.28
55.36
--
88.43
86.13
13.07
2.66
SSOs
Forest
Units
CSOs
Crop(C)
Loads
Industrial
Crop(B)
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
0.00
433.20
0.47
TSS
tons
142.43
--
--
0.28
1.75
--
26.07
0.06
36.94
--
30.10
50.55
4.90
0.11
0.66
18.95
0.01
BOD
pounds
15,245
--
--
100
323
--
5,417
14
3,530
--
2,969
3,694
503
91
2,869.22
6,091.83
6.67
FC
billion counts
189,095
--
--
11
8,533
--
22,184
73
15,536
--
97,529
29,929
13,854
491,238
517

land.
TABLE 4-118
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Loads
TP
TSS
BOD
FC
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
23%
46%
37%
22%
-----
-----
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
1%
-----
32%
8%
13%
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
4%
12%
9%
2%
-----
6%
10%
7%
11%
6%
16%
9%
3%
1%
2%
1%
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
7%
0%
29%
6%
15%
57%
0%
0%
0%
0%
4-179
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-119
BASELINE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
tons/acre
0.25
0.10
---
---
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
---
0.35
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.04
0.03
---
0.06
0.02
0.06
0.04
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.32
0.01
0.00
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
11.16
--
--
0.07
0.24
--
3.97
0.01
2.58
--
2.17
2.70
0.37
0.07
2.10
4.46
0.00
FC
billion counts/acre
138
--
--
--
16
11
--
71
22
10
360
Loads
Units
TP
pounds/acre
TSS

TABLE 4-120
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
3,315.08
6.46
2.63
16.69
67.87
91.35
4,686.48
3.67
521.50
0.08
691.59
423.24
74.24
51.11
1,441.15
489.24
895.04
TSS
tons
1,438.40
7.32
3.01
2.68
31.64
3.07
221.75
0.16
370.14
0.02
236.71
251.51
27.87
1.86
6.20
21.40
25.63
BOD
pounds
148,872
290
114
1,031
5,801
1,258
52,697
39
33,256
23,218
101,927
2,856
1,758
15,860.00
6,879.91
12,611.98
49
34
116
153,048
1,912
224,981
212
146,232
760,972
146,879
78,674
103
554,787
978,056
Loads
Units
FC
billion counts 1,845,301

4-180
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-121
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (PERCENT)
SSOs
0%
CSOs
4%
Industrial
0%
Wetland
37%
Ultra Low
1%
Transportation
1%
Residential
0%
Pasture(B)
Government /
Institution
0%
Industrial
Forest
0%
Grass(D)
Crop(C)
26%
Grass(C)
Crop(B)
TP
Loads
Point Sources
Grass(B)
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
5%
3%
1%
0%
11%
4%
7%
1%
TSS
54%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
8%
0%
14%
0%
9%
9%
1%
0%
0%
1%
BOD
36%
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
13%
0%
8%
0%
6%
25%
1%
0%
4%
2%
3%
FC
38%
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
5%
0%
3%
0%
16%
3%
2%
0%
0%
11%
20%
TABLE 4-122
BASELINE CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
pounds/acre
Crop(C)
Units
TP
Crop(B)
Loads
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
0.259
0.001
0.000
0.001
0.005
0.007
0.367
0.000
0.041
0.000
0.054
0.033
0.006
0.004
0.113
0.038
0.070
0.002
TSS
tons/acre
0.113
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.017
0.000
0.029
0.000
0.019
0.020
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.002
BOD
pounds/acre
11.645
0.023
0.009
0.081
0.454
0.098
4.122
0.003
2.601
0.001
1.816
7.973
0.223
0.138
1.241
0.538
0.987
FC
billion counts/acre
144.341
0.004
0.003
0.009
11.972
0.150
17.598
0.017
11.438
0.000
59.524
11.489
6.154
0.008
0.000
43.396
76.504
Cumulative units are weights (or billion counts) per acre per year. A "0" represents a nonzero value less than 0.0005 pounds per acre per year
4-181
Kinnickinnic River

The flashiness within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10) was
evaluated. The index of flashiness quantifies the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in
stream flow. In this area, the flashiness was assessed as poor. This assessment of flashiness
potential to disturb aquatic life and habitat. The Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point
area (KK-10) does not contain any assessed plant communities. Dissolved oxygen is another key
factor affecting habitat suitability. Insufficient DO (less than 5.0 mg/l) will stress aquatic life.
Maintaining sufficient DO concentrations throughout the year is an important component of
aquatic habitat. However, excessive DO concentrations (greater than 15 mg/l) can also harm
aquatic life, especially during warm weather months. The minimum and maximum DO
concentrations were assessed as very good during the warm weather months. See Chapter 6,
Section 6.4 for more detail on modeled flashiness and water quality parameters affecting habitat
Baseline BOD loads within the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area (KK-10).
The major reason for the reduction in Baseline FC loads is the projection in the RWQMPU that
33% of the unknown FC source loads will be eliminated. The assumption made in the
RWQMPU (Planning Report No. 50, Chapter 10) was that 33% of the unknown sources would
be identified and eliminated by the year 2020. The 33% was determined based on professional
judgment, considering the challenges and expense of finding and fixing the sources.
Modeled Year 2020 water quality for the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area is
presented TABLE 4-123. This table also reflects compliance with applicable water quality
standards within the assessment point area. In the table, the level of compliance for a given
water quality parameter will not necessarily match the detailed assessment of the given
parameter discussed in the next paragraph. The potential disparity is a function of different
evaluation criteria that were used. For example, where applicable, the table evaluates
compliance with water quality variance standards while the detailed assessments are focused on
habitat and do not consider special water quality variance standards.
pollutant load, TABLE 4-128 presents the Year 2020 percentage breakdown for each cumulative
load, and TABLE 4-129 presents the Year 2020 cumulative annual pollutant loads on a per acre
basis.
that the assessment of FC would remain poor for the annual measure, but improve from poor to
moderate during the swimming season. The assessment of TP would also remain poor. The
assessments of both the minimum and maximum concentrations of DO would remain as very
good. The assessments of TSS would remain unchanged as very good. The preceding Year
4-182
Kinnickinnic River
standards. Modeling of the Year 2020 conditions indicate that the assessment of flashiness within
the Kinnickinnic River mainstem assessment point area would remain unchanged as poor. See
conditions.
TABLE 4-123
MODELED YEAR 2020 WATER QUALITY IN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT
POINT AREA (KK-10)
Assessment
Point
KK-10
Kinnickinnic River
near Upstream
Limit of Estuary
Water Quality
Indicator
(annual)

(May-September: 153
days total)
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Statistic
Year 2020 Condition

78
449

292
Copper
1,634

89
253

152
Mean (mg/l)
11.4
Median (mg/l)
11.5

standard (>2 mg/l)a
100
Mean (mg/l)
0.185
Median (mg/l)
0.155

Total Nitrogen
3,091
28
Mean (mg/l)
1.26
Median (mg/l)
1.11
Mean (mg/l)
10.7
Median (mg/l)
3.9
Mean (mg/l)
0.0040
Median (mg/l)
0.0017
4-183
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-124
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Transportation*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential*
Ultra Low*
Loads
Government /
Institution*
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
294.85
--
--
1.47
3.35
--
366.23
1.02
41.19
--
74.16
76.21
10.53
2.73
0.00
262.51
0.00
TSS
tons
111.30
--
--
0.26
1.39
--
20.03
0.05
24.73
--
22.71
40.24
3.55
0.11
0.66
11.48
0.01
BOD
pounds
12,713
--
--
94
275
--
4,455
12
2,522
--
2,390
3,138
389
93
2,869
3,692
FC
billion counts
104,636
--
--
11
4,810
--
12,102
41
7,364
--
52,109
16,872
7,113
297,682
517

land.
TABLE 4-125
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution*
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial*
Pasture(B)
Residential*
Transportation*
Ultra Low*
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial*
Nonpoint Sources
TP
26%
--
--
0%
0%
--
32%
0%
4%
--
7%
7%
1%
0%
0%
23%
0%
TSS
47%
--
--
0%
1%
--
8%
0%
10%
--
10%
17%
2%
0%
0%
5%
0%
BOD
39%
--
--
0%
1%
--
14%
0%
8%
--
7%
10%
1%
0%
9%
11%
0%
FC
21%
--
--
0%
1%
--
2%
0%
1%
--
10%
3%
1%
0%
0%
59%
0%
Loads
4-184
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-126
YEAR 2020 LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
Units
Transportation
Ultra Low
Loads
TP
pounds/acre
0.22
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.27
0.00
0.03
--
0.05
0.06
0.01
0.00
0.19
TSS
tons/acre
0.08
--
--
0.00
0.00
--
0.01
0.00
0.02
--
0.02
0.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
BOD
pounds/acre
--
--
--
--
FC
billion counts/acre
137
--
--
--
16
10
--
68
389
SSOs
Crop(B)
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources

TABLE 4-127
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Government /
Institution
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Residential
Transportation
Ultra Low
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
Loads
Units
TP
pounds
2,970.96
--
--
14.63
60.30
71.92
3,665.81
2.97
448.49
--
607.13
367.67
65.17
42.72
1,441.15
289.99
131.40
TSS
tons
1,138.27
--
--
2.37
24.52
2.33
171.26
0.12
284.40
--
184.47
193.74
21.88
1.56
6.20
12.69
3.78
BOD
pounds
128,336
--
--
907
4,858
1,040
43,645
33
27,340
--
19,812
98,835
2,417
1,469
15,860
4,078
1,858
FC
billion counts
1,028,809
--
--
102
81,577
1,046
123,321
120
77,884
--
415,405
79,146
43,552
87
328,838
144,101

4-185
Kinnickinnic River
TABLE 4-128
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (PERCENT)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Transportation
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential
Ultra Low
Loads
Government /
Institution
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds
29%
--
--
0%
1%
1%
36%
0%
4%
--
6%
4%
1%
0%
14%
3%
1%
TSS
tons
56%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
8%
0%
14%
--
9%
9%
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
BOD
pounds
37%
--
--
0%
1%
0%
12%
0%
8%
--
6%
28%
1%
0%
5%
1%
1%
FC
billion counts
44%
--
--
0%
4%
0%
5%
0%
3%
--
18%
3%
2%
0%
0%
14%
6%
TABLE 4-129
YEAR 2020 CUMULATIVE LOADS FOR THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER MAINSTEM ASSESSMENT POINT AREA (KK-10) (UNITS / ACRE / YEAR)
Crop(B)
Crop(C)
Forest
Grass(B)
Grass(C)
Grass(D)
Industrial
Pasture(B)
Transportation
Wetland
Industrial
CSOs
SSOs
Units
Residential
Ultra Low
Loads
Government /
Institution
Point Sources
Commercial
Nonpoint Sources
TP
pounds/acre
0.232
--
--
0.001
0.005
0.006
0.287
0.000
0.035
--
0.047
0.029
0.005
0.003
0.113
0.023
0.010
TSS
tons/acre
0.089
--
--
0.000
0.002
0.000
0.013
0.000
0.022
--
0.014
0.015
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.000
BOD
pounds/acre
10.039
--
--
0.071
0.380
0.081
3.414
0.003
2.139
--
1.550
7.731
0.189
0.115
1.241
0.319
0.145
FC
billion counts/acre
80.474
--
--
0.008
6.381
0.082
9.646
0.009
6.092
--
32.493
6.191
3.407
0.007
0.000
25.722
11.272
4-186
APPENDIX 4A
MEMORANDUM REPORT NO. 194
STREAM HABITAT
CONDITIONS AND
BIOLOGICAL
ASSESSMENT OF THE
KINNICKINNIC AND
MENOMONEE RIVER
WATERSHEDS: 2000-2009
SOUTHEASTERN
WISCONSIN
REGIONAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
KENOSHA COUNTY
RACINE COUNTY
Anita M. Faraone
Adelene Greene,
Secretary
Robert W. Pitts
Susan S. Greenfield
Mary A. Kacmarcik
Michael J. Miklasevich
MILWAUKEE COUNTY
WALWORTH COUNTY
Brian Dranzik
John Rogers
John F. Weishan, Jr.
Richard A. Hansen,
Vice-Chairman
Gregory L. Holden
Nancy Russell,
Treasurer
OZAUKEE COUNTY
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Thomas H. Buestrin
William E. Johnson
Gustav W. Wirth, Jr.
John M. Jung
Daniel S. Schmidt
David L. Stroik,
Chairman
WAUKESHA COUNTY
James T. Dwyer
Anselmo Villareal
Paul G. Vrakas
SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGIONAL

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF
Kenneth R. Yunker, PE..............................................Executive Director
SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN WATERSHEDS

TRUST, INC. (SWWT) SCIENCE COMMITTEE
J. Val Klump, Ph.D., Chairman ................ Director and Senior Scientist,
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,
Great Lakes WATER Institute,
Senior Scientist and Adjunct
Professor, Department of Biological
Sciences and Department
of Geosciences
Ezra Meyer, Vice-Chairman ............ Water Specialist, Clean Wisconsin
SWWT-Kinnickinnic River Watershed Action Team Co-chairs:

Benjamin Gramling, Director of Environmental Health Programs,
Sixteenth Street Community Health Center
Benjamin P. Sykes, Foley and Lardner, LLP
SWWT-Menomonee River Watershed Action Team Co-Chairs:

Gail Epping Overholt, Milwaukee River
Basin Educator, UW-Extension
Cheryl Nenn, Riverkeeper, Milwaukee Riverkeeper
SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Special acknowledgements for discussion of ideas and concepts and
provision of data used in this report:
Stephen P. Adams.............. Public Involvement and Outreach Manager

Nancy M. Anderson, AICP ........... Chief Community Assistance Planner
Michael G. Hahn, PE, PH ....................... Chief Environmental Engineer
Christopher T. Hiebert, PE ...................... Chief Transportation Engineer
Elizabeth A. Larsen .................................................. Business Manager
John G. McDougall .............. Geographic Information Systems Manager
John R. Meland ..........................Chief Economic Development Planner
Dr. Donald M. Reed ......................................................... Chief Biologist
Donald P. Simon, RLS ..................................... Chief Planning Illustrator
William J. Stauber............................................. Chief Land Use Planner
Special acknowledgement is due to Dr. Thomas M. Slawski, SEWRPC

Principal Planner, Mr. Ronald J. Printz, PE, Principal Engineer, Ms.
Sara W. Teske, Research Analyst, Mr. Michael B. Scott, GIS
Application Specialist, and Mr. Edward J. Schmidt, GIS Planning
Specialist, for their contributions to the conduct of this study and the
preparation of this report.
Chris Magruder ................................ Community Environmental Liaison,

Breanne L. McDonald .......................... Water Resource & Sustainability
Specialist, Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District
Marsha Burzynski, ................................ Water Resources Management
Specialist, Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources
Faith A. Fitzpatrick, Ph.D., ...................................Research Hydrologist,
U.S. Geological Survey,
Wisconsin Water Science Center
Barbara C. Scudder ....................... Hydrologist (Biology)/Environmental
Program Coordinator,
U.S. Geological Survey,
Jeffrey J. Steuer ........................... Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey,
Robert C. Anderson, Ph.D. .................... Professor, Wisconsin Lutheran
College Biology Department
Morgan A. Schneider, ................... Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey,
Thomas R. Sear, PE, CFM .............................. Senior Project Engineer,
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH)
Kimberly Gleffe ......................................................... Executive Director,
Cheryl Nenn ...................................................................... Riverkeeper,
Milwaukee Riverkeeper
MEMORANDUM REPORT
NUMBER 194
STREAM HABITAT CONDITIONS AND

BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE KINNICKINNIC
AND MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHEDS: 2000-2009
Prepared by the
W239 N1812 Rockwood Drive
P.O. Box 1607
Waukesha, Wisconsin 53187-1607
www.sewrpc.org
Preparation of this report was funded in part by the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District.
January 2010
$10.00
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Page
Chapter IINTRODUCTION ........................
Background .........................................................
Project Identification, Development,
and Prioritization .......................................
1
1
Chapter IIINVENTORY FINDINGS ..........

Introduction and Background ..............................
Stream System Characteristics ......................
Urban Development, Imperviousness,
and Hydrology ...........................................
What is Habitat? ............................................
Inventory Findings...............................................
Historical Conditions ....................................
Current Conditions ........................................
Kinnickinnic River .................................
Menomonee River ..................................
Biological Conditions ...................................
Channel Obstructions
or Fragmentation .................................
Existing Water Quality
Monitoring Information .............................
5
5
5
Chapter IIIWATERSHED
TARGETS, OBJECTIVES, AND
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS .....................
Introduction .........................................................
Land-Based Measures ...................................
Instream-Based Measures .............................
Recommended Land-Based
Habitat Protection Actions ...............................
Riparian Corridors ........................................
Corridor Target 1 ....................................
Issue .................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................
Recommended Actions ....................
Potential Measures ...........................
Corridor Target 2 ....................................
Issue .................................................
Objective ..........................................
Corridor Target 3 ....................................
Issue .................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................

Information Needs ............................
Hydrology ......................................................
Hydrology Target 1 .................................
Issue ..................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................
Recommended Actions.....................
Water Quality and Quantity...........................
Water Quality and Quantity Target 1 ......
Issue ..................................................
Objective ..........................................
Land-Based Monitoring
and Information ..........................................
Monitoring and Information Target 1 .....
Issue ..................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................
Instream Habitat Protection Measures .................
Aquatic Organism Passage ............................
Aquatic Organism Passage Target 1 .......
Issue ..................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................
Information Needs ............................
Aquatic Habitat..............................................
Aquatic Habitat Target 1 .........................
Issue ..................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................
Information Needs ..................................
Aquatic Organisms ........................................
Aquatic Organism Target 1 .....................
Issue ..................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................
9
16
17
17
21
21
22
24
28
34
37
37
37
38
41
57
57
57
57
57
57
58
58
58
58
58
58
59
59
59
59
59
iii
60
60
60
61
61
61
61
61
62
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
64
64
64
64
64
64
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
66
66
66
66
69
69
69
69
70
70
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
Page
Page
Instream Monitoring and
Informational Programming ......................
Target......................................................
Issue .................................................
Key Questions ..................................
Objective ..........................................
Recreation .....................................................
Recreation Target 1 ................................
Issue ........................................................
Key Questions ........................................
Objectives ........................................
Sampling Parameters and Methodologies ...........
Habitat Assessment .......................................

Biological Assessment...................................
Fisheries ..................................................
Invertebrates............................................
Algae .......................................................
Hydrological Assessment........................
Additional Monitoring
and Evaluation Parameters
to Consider .................................................
Ancillary recommendations .................................
Summary and Synthesis ......................................
Priority Actions to Improve Habitat ..............
Kinnickinnic River Watershed ................
Menomonee River Watershed.................
Kinnickinnic and Menomonee
River Watersheds.................................
72
72
72
72
72
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
74
76
76
76
77
78
78
78
79
79
80
81
82
82
82
83
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
A
Page
List of River Cleanup Sites within the Milwaukee, Menomonee,
and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds: Spring 2009 ...........................................................................
87
Residential Yard Care Fact Sheet to Improve Water Quality and the Environment ........................
93
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and University of Wisconsin-Extension

Rain Garden Design and Construction Manual for Residential Homeowners .................................
103
Road/Stream Crossing Inspection Protocol Data Sheet....................................................................
137
Qualitative Fish Habitat Rating Protocols for Small and Large Wadable Streams ..........................
143
Protocols for Studying Wet Weather Impacts and Urbanization Patterns ........................................
149
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
Chapter II
1
2
3
4
Physical and Biological Conditions along Reaches

within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2000-2009 ......................................................................
Physical and Biological Conditions along Reaches
within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2000-2009 .....................................................................
Approximate Percentage of Connected Impervious
Surfaces Created By Urban Development ........................................................................................
Average Trophic-Level Rankings and Aggregate Bioassessment Ranking
Among Stream Sites within the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds: 2004-2005 .................................
iv
6
7
10
27
Table
5
6
7
Page
Fish, Invertebrate, and Habitat Quality Among Reaches
Fish Species Composition Among Reaches in the
Menomonee River Watershed: 1902-1999 vs. 2000-2009 ...............................................................
Fish Species Composition Among Reaches in the
Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 1902-1999 vs. 2000-2009 ..............................................................
28
30
33
Chapter III
8
Fish Passage Assessment At Road Crossing Structures, Calculated Stream Length between
Structures, and Biological (fish, invertebrate) and Habitat Quality Determinations Among
Mainstem and Tributary Reaches within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2000-2009 ................
42
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
Chapter II
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Typical Stream Network Patterns Based on Hortons Classification System ..................................

Relation between Recovery Time and Sensitivity to Disturbance for
Different Hierarchical Spatial Scales Associated with Stream Systems ..........................................
A Comparison of Hydrographs Before and After Urbanization .......................................................
What Has Been Learned from Bioretention and Rain Garden Studies? ...........................................
Comparison of Total Phosphorus Concentrations Among Combined
Sewer Overflows (CSOs), Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs), and
Stormwater Outfall Discharges within the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds ....................................
Comparison of Total Suspended Solids Concentrations Among Combined
Sewer Overflows (CSOs), Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs), and
Stormwater Outfall Discharges within the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds ....................................
Predicted and Observed Chloride Concentrations At 70th Street
Examples of Trash and Debris within the
Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds ..................................................................
Schematic Diagram Depicting the Relationship between Land Use,
Hydrology, Water Quality, Habitat Quality, and Ecological Health ................................................
Examples of a Combination of Channel Enclosure, Concrete Channel
Lining, and Drop Structures Engineered for Floodwater Control
within the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds .................................................
Underwood Creek Flood Mitigation and
Stream Restoration Pre- and Post-Construction ...............................................................................
Example of Channel Erosion Downstream of Concrete Lining on Lyons
Park Creek (within Reach KK-1) within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed...................................
Examples of Excessive Streambed and Streambank Erosion
Conditions within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed ......................................................................
Outfall Treatments Constructed As Part of the Underwood Creek
Flood Mitigation and Stream Restoration Project: 2009 ..................................................................
Fish Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) Scores Compared to Percent
Urban Land Use Among Sites in the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds ............................................
A Modified Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI-10) Compared to Percent
Urban Land Use Among Sites in the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds ............................................
v
8
9
11
12
13
13
14
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
26
Figure
17
18
19
20
21
22
Page
Concrete Lining in the Menomonee River Watershed near the
Canadian Pacific Railway Bridge from River Mile 3.62 to 4.24......................................................
Menomonee Falls Dam in the Menomonee River Watershed At River Mile 21.93.........................
Adult Salmon Migrating from Lake Michigan Trying to Swim
through the Excessive Velocities within the Concrete Lining of
the Menomonee River Watershed Downstream of River Mile 4.24 ................................................
Concrete Lining in the Kinnickinnic River Watershed within Reach KK-10 ..................................
Restoration of Excessive Streambank and Streambed Erosion and
Reconnection of Floodplain within the Menomonee River At Hoyt Park .......................................
Pre- versus Post- Concrete Channel and Drop Structure Removal/Stream
Restoration near N. 43rd Street and W. State Street along the Menomonee River ..........................
29
29
32
34
35
36
Chapter III
23
24
25
26
Instream Three-Tier Prioritization Strategy within the Menomonee River Watershed ....................
Instream Three-Tier Prioritization Strategy within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed ...................
Fish Passage Obstructions within the Menomonee River Watershed between
Swan Boulevard and Harmonee Avenue within the Menomonee River: 2009 ................................
Downstream Reaches within the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River Watersheds..............
39
40
67
70
LIST OF MAPS
Map
Page
Chapter II
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Mainstem Reaches, Tributary Reaches, and Assessment

Points within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2009 ...................................
Mainstem Reaches, Tributary Reaches, and Assessment
Points within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2009 ..................................
Historical versus Current Stream Channel Alignments
within the Menomonee River Watershed: 1836 and 2005 ..............................
Historical versus Current Stream Channel Alignments
within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 1836 and 2005 .............................
Stream Channel and Biological Quality Conditions
within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2000-2009 ....................................
Riparian Corridor and Plant Community Conditions
within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2009 .............................................
Riparian Corridor Conditions and Groundwater Recharge
Potential within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2009 ..............................
Stream Channel and Biological Quality Conditions
within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2000-2009 .....................................
Riparian Corridor and Plant Community Conditions
within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2009 ..............................................
Riparian Corridor Conditions and Groundwater Recharge
Potential within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2009 ...............................
Point Source Outfall Locations and Water Quality Monitoring
Station Locations within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2009 .................
Point Source Outfall Locations and Water Quality Monitoring
Station Locations within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2009 ................
vi
Following Chapter III

Map
Page
Chapter III
13
14
15
16
Proposed Priority Protection Areas within

the Menomonee River Watershed: 2009 .........................................................
Proposed Priority Protection Areas within
the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2009 ........................................................
Recreational Corridor Trails and Priority Protection Areas
within the Menomonee River Watershed: 2009 ..............................................
Recreational Corridor Trails and Priority Protection Areas
within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed: 2009 .............................................
vii

Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) is the State-designated and Federally
recognized areawide water quality planning agency with responsibility for preparation of a regional water quality
management plan for the seven-county Southeastern Wisconsin Region. In this capacity, the Commission
prepared and adopted the first areawide water quality management plan for the Southeastern Wisconsin Region in
1979.1 This plan has been amended, refined, and updated since 1979 with the most recent major plan amendment
being documented in SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50 (PR No. 50), A Regional Water Quality Management
Plan Update for the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, which was completed in 2007.2 From the outset, SEWRPC
has approached the process of developing a regional water quality management plan, and all subsidiary plans,
within a watershed framework, incorporating regional land use planning, public involvement, and application of
sound science. This plan, based upon a five year data gathering, analysis, and interpretation effort that is
summarized in SEWRPC Technical Report No. 39 (TR No. 39), Water Quality Conditions and Sources of
Pollution in the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, continues this long-standing tradition.3
Key elements in the PR No. 50 planning process included:
Application of updated land use, demographic, and economic data through the year 2000, and updated
planned land use, demographic, and economic data through the plan year 2035;
Coordination with, and incorporation of, the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD)
2020 facilities plan;
_____________
1
SEWRPC Planning Report No. 30, A Regional Water Quality Management Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin
2000, Volume One, Inventory Findings, September 1978; Volume Two, Alternative Plans, February 1979; and
Volume Three, Recommended Plan, June 1979.
2
SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50, A Regional Water Quality Management Plan Update for the Greater
Milwaukee Watersheds, December 2007.
SEWRPC Technical Report No. 39, Water Quality Conditions and Sources of Pollution in the Greater Milwaukee
River Watersheds, November 2007.
Consideration of historical and existing surface water and groundwater conditions as the basis for
formulating and refining recommendations for actions to continue to improve fishery and water-based
recreational conditionsincluding extensive consideration of riparian buffers (Appendix O), and
criteria and guidelines for stream crossings to allow fish passage and allow stream stability
(Appendix P), as well as consideration of sediment remediation as part of dam removal, stream corridor management as an element of aquatic and terrestrial fish and wildlife management, restoration of
connectivity along streams, and re-naturalization of stream hydrology;
Identification of sources of water pollution under existing and future land use conditions;
Utilization of simulation models;
Review of the existing legal structure governing the management and mitigation of the sources of
pollution;
Review of technological options and management for management and mitigation;
Refinement of planning objectives, principles, and standards;
Participation of multiple stakeholder groups, including both governmental and nongovernmental

organizations.
The Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. (SWWT),4 is a new umbrella organization that was formed in
response to the recommendations set forth in PR No. 50. The SWWT is a nongovernmental, voluntary
organization dedicated to promoting and encouraging the protection and improvement of water quality in the
Greater Milwaukee Watersheds. The SWWT operates through a committee structure that includes: Executive
Steering Council, Science Committee, Policy Committee, Watershed Action Teams, and Ad Hoc Committees.
The Science Committee of the SWWT formed the Habitat Subcommittee (hereinafter, the Subcommittee) at their
meeting on May 14, 2009. It was requested that the SEWRPC staff serve as the Chair of the Subcommittee, which
was formed to address habitat issues related to the preparation by MMSD and SWWT of watershed restoration
plans (WRPs) for the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. The Subcommittee was tasked with
developing recommendations for conserving and restoring fisheries and wildlife habitat within the Menomonee
and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. Specific tasks assigned to the Subcommittee included:
Characterizing existing instream and riparian physical and biological conditions based on SEWRPC
TR No. 39;
Defining habitat, including consideration of factors that influence habitat quality;
Identifying data gaps and information needs;
Identifying potential habitat restoration projects that would be expected to positively influence the
overall aquatic ecosystem based on existing information; and
Recommending future habitat data collection and analysis, and possible additional planning
requirements, after the WRPs are completed.
_____________
4
Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. (SWWT), http://www.swwtwater.org/home/.
This report expands on habitat-related information set forth in PR No. 50 and includes fishery, invertebrate, and
habitat data gathered since completion of that plan up to the year 2009. Specifically, this report is intended to
provide the Science Committee members with a basis to understand the quality and extent of habitat, limitations
to habitat, and project prioritization strategies to improve habitat and the resultant fisheries within the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. This report provides the basis for integration of habitat-related
recommendations in the WRPs. This document summarizes data, research, and information gathered among
numerous formal and informal meetings with the Science Committee, SWWT Menomonee and Kinnickinnic
River Watershed Action Teams, MMSD, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), nongovernmental agencies, and various university faculties held between May through
November 2009.
Project Identification, Development, and Prioritization
This report presents the results of an inventory and analysis of the surface waters and related features of the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. It includes descriptive information pertaining to the historical
trends and current status of habitat (physical, chemical, and biological) quality and ecological integrity, bank
stability, and potential limitations to water quality and fishery resources. To the extent that instream biological
conditions are a reflection of channel conditions and structures, and to the extent that channel conditions are a
reflection of riparian corridor conditions, either existing or historical, this report is based on the instream surveys
completed during the process of data gathering associated with the regional water quality management plan
update. This monitoring data was provided by WDNR, USGS, MMSD, and Wisconsin Lutheran College. This
report is intended to provide a strategic framework for decision-making for the purpose of protecting and
improving recreation, water quality, and fisheries. Specifically, it summarizes the biological and habitat quality
within each watershed; identifies factors potentially limiting the aquatic community and habitat quality; identifies
information needs; provides recommended goals, objectives, and actions to address the impairments; recommends
a prioritization strategy to maximize project cost effectiveness; and recommends post-project monitoring to assess
project success.
Chapter II
INVENTORY FINDINGS
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
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, two recently completed and separate regional planning documents, SEWRPC
Technical Report No. 39 (TR No. 39), Water Quality Conditions and Sources of Pollution in the Greater
Milwaukee Watersheds, November 2007, and SEWRPC Planning Report No. 50 (PR No. 50), A Regional Water
Quality Management Plan Update for the Greater Milwaukee Watersheds, December 2007, have thoroughly
described both the natural resource base and the man-made features of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds, thereby establishing a factual base upon which the refined local watershed restoration planning
process undertaken by the Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc., with funding from the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District could proceed. A more thorough description of the natural and human-made
features of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds can be found on the Southeastern Wisconsin
Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) website (www.sewrpc.org).
The following sections present a summary of important stream characteristics and their relationship to agricultural
and urban development, as well as an inventory and analysis of the surface waters and related features of the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. Included is descriptive information pertaining to the historical
trends and current status of habitat (physical and biological) quality and ecological integrity within the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds, bank and bed stability evaluation, riparian buffer analysis, and
potential limitations to water quality and fishery resources.
Stream System Characteristics
Water from rainfall and snowmelt flows into streams by one of two pathways: 1) either directly flowing overland
as surface water runoff or 2) infiltrating into the soil surface, recharging the groundwater, and eventually reaching
streams as baseflow. Ephemeral, or intermittent, streams generally flow only during the wet season or during
large rainfall events. Perennial streams that flow year-round are primarily sustained by groundwater during dry
periods. The surface water drainage systems within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds contain
totals of about 142 and 31 miles of both perennial and ephemeral streams, respectively, as shown on Maps 1
and 2. Maps 1 and 2 show the modeling assessment points and reaches for the Menomonee River and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds. The reaches for the Menomonee River watershed range from MN-1 through MN19 and from KK-1 through KK-11 for the Kinnickinnic River watershed (see Tables 1 and 2). These reaches form
the basis for the summary statistics and recommendations in this report.
5
Table 1
PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL CONDITIONS ALONG REACHES WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2000-2009
Mainstem Reaches and Subwatersheds
MN-5
MN-9
MN-12
MN-17
MN-17A
MN-18
MN-19
4.64
7.33
6.22
8.20
5.13
5.71
3.31
5.70
18.48
18.86
5.69
3.44
5.66
4.16
3.48
4.88
4.86
7.45
5.43
3.46
6.13
6.68
10.87
8.70
7.78
10.10
11.89
11.95
1.20
2.53
8.99
4.02
2.04
2.18
8.24
4.22
3.59
2.10
43.74
37.10
Streambed Conditions
Degrading (miles)
Degrading (percent)
Aggrading (miles)
Aggrading (percent)
Bedrock (miles)
Bedrock (percent)
Concrete Lining (miles)
Concrete Lining (percent)
Enclosed Channel (miles)
Enclosed Channel (percent)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.52
5.11
1.21
11.90
0
0
0
0
0.76
7.52
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.66
15.63
0.26
6.16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.07
91.06
0
0
0
0
0.18
4.47
0
0
2.63
65.34
0.14
3.48
0
0
0.27
3.1
0.12
1.38
4.41
50.81
2.44
28.11
0
0
0.96
21.38
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.12
1.39
0.69
8.00
0.31
3.60
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.06
0.98
0
0
0
0
0.07
3.10
0
0
0.08
3.55
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.42
8.11
0.85
16.42
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.71
<1
3.97
<1
1.25
<1
8.96
<1
3.34
<1
Streambank Conditions
Proportion of Total Stream Length Assessed (percent)

Total Length of Eroding bank (miles)
Proportion Eroding (percent)
NA
NA
NA
2
0
0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
0
0
0.1
0
0
54
0.85
8
100
2.45
71
100
0.05
1
28
0
0
62
0.25
5
34
0
0
60
0.19
5
100
0.23
3
45
0.43
10
72
0.92
11
77
0.41
21
100
0.25
4
100
0.26
12
100
0.17
3
100
0.00
0.00
17
6.45
45
Obstructions
Dam and Drop Structures (number)

Road Crossings Culverts and Bridges (number)
Total Obstructions (number)
Total Obstructions Road/Rail Crossings, Culverts,
Bridges, Dams, Drop Structures (number/mile)
0
8
8
1.8
0
5
5
2.2
0
14
14
3.9
0
3
3
1.1
1
15
16
4.9
0
8
8
3.5
0
31
31
3.0
0
16
16
4.7
0
9
9
2.3
1
8
9
3.7
3
21
24
6.1
0
5
5
2.9
6
20
26
6.9
15
21
36
4.8
0
10
10
2.3
3
21
24
3.0
0
5
5
2.3
1
10
11
2.7
5
8
13
6.0
1
21
22
5.2
0
10
10
4.8
36
269
305
8.2
Point Source Outfall Locations
Noncontact Cooling Water Permits (number)

Individual Permits (number)
SSO (number)
CSO (number)
Stormwater Outfalls (number)
Point Source Outlet Totals (number)
Stormwater Outfalls (number/mile)
Point Source Outlets (number/mile)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0.4
1
0
0
0
3
4
0.8
1.1
1
0
0
0
6
7
2.1
2.5
7
0
0
0
10
17
3.1
5.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
1
1
0
27
41
2.6
3.9
0
0
0
0
8
8
2.3
2.3
0
0
4
0
13
17
3.3
4.3
0
0
3
0
9
12
3.7
4.9
0
0
2
0
5
7
1.3
1.8
2
0
3
0
12
17
6.9
9.8
2
1
8
0
4
15
1.1
4.0
2
1
9
0
38
50
5.0
6.6
1
0
2
0
50
53
11.3
12.0
3
1
3
0
20
27
2.5
3.4
2
0
0
0
5
7
2.3
3.3
8
0
8
0
7
23
1.7
5.7
1
0
4
0
0
5
0.0
2.3
11
3
7
8
14
43
3.3
10.2
8
1
0
21
5
35
2.4
16.7
62
8
54
29
236
389
1.2
2.7
Riparian Buffersa
Proportion of Total Stream Length that Riparian Buffers

were Assessed (percent)
Riparian Buffers <75 Feet wide (percent)
Riparian Buffers >75 Feet wide (percent)
91
93
85
95
98
95
92
96
94
28
54
40
57
70
84
94
71
100
93
91
100
85
50
50
27
73
33
67
43
57
36
64
71
29
52
48
72
28
54
46
100
0
52
48
50
50
77
23
72
28
59
41
59
41
26
74
47
53
34
66
94
6
100
0
45
40
Plant Community Assessmentb
FQI Very Poor (number sites)

FQI Poor (number sites)
FQI Fair (number sites)
FQI Fairly Good (number sites)
FQI Good (number sites)
Total (number)
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
3
3
1
1
0
0
5
1
1
0
0
2
4
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
3
5
0
13
0
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
2
1
1
1
2
0
5
1
2
1
0
0
4
0
2
1
1
1
5
0
1
1
0
1
3
0
1
2
0
0
3
0
5
0
2
2
9
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
1
2
0
4
0
1
0
1
0
2
1
1
2
0
1
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
22
14
17
10
74
Monitoring Stations
Milwaukee River Keepers Level 1c

Milwaukee River Keepers Thermal
MMSD Surface Water Quality Monitoring Sites
MMSD Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Sites
USGS Level Gauge Stations
USGS Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Sites
Precipitation Gauges
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
0
0
1
1
3
1
0
5
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
0
0
7
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
1
13
12
7
24
0
1
10
7
0
0
0
0
Honey Creek
8.32
14.63
Underwood
CreekUpper
3.75
6.16
Dousman Ditch
Area (square miles)

Total Stream Length (miles)
Physical, Biological, or Programmatic Component
Butler Ditch
Stream Channel Conditions
Parameters
Willow Creek
Menomonee
RiverLowerd
MN-16
Menomonee
RiverLowerc
MN-14
Menomonee
RiverLowerb
MN-14A
Menomonee
RiverLowera
MN-13
Menomonee
RiverUpperd
MN-13A
Menomonee
RiverUpperc
MN-8
Menomonee
RiverUpperb
MN-7
Underwood
CreekLower
MN-11
South Branch
Underwood Creek
MN-10
Lilly Creek
West Branch
Menomonee River
MN-6
Little Menomonee
River
Menomonee
RiverUppera
MN-4
Little Menomonee
Creek
MN-3
Nor-X-Way Channel
MN-2
North Branch
Menomonee River
Tributary Reaches and Subwatersheds

MN-1
Watershed
Total
a
Riparian buffer segments includes separate buffer widths for the right bank and left bank.
b
The following qualities were assigned to the Floristic Quality Index (10-19 = Very Poor, 20-29 = Poor, 30-39 = Fair, 40-49 = Fairly Good, 50-59 = Good).
c
Level-1 volunteers conduct periodic stream assessments and measure dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity, flow, and qualitative aquatic invertebrate assessments. Level-2 volunteers are advanced monitors that assess water quality using WDNR equipment and protocols for pH, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and
temperature (using automated programmable temperature data loggers).
Source: SEWRPC.
Table 2
PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL CONDITIONS ALONG REACHES WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2000-2009
Kinnickinnic
RiverLower
KK-11
Kinnickinnic
RiverMiddle
KK-10
(includes KK-9)
Kinnickinnic
RiverUpper
KK-3
South 43rd
Street Ditch
KK-2
Lyons Park
Creek
KK-1
Cherokee Park
Creek
KK-7
Villa Mann
Creek
KK-6
Holmes Avenue
Creek
KK-5
Wilson Park
CreekLower
KK-8
Wilson Park
CreekUpper
KK-4
Stream Channel Conditions
Area (square miles)

Total Stream Length (miles)
3.47
6.95
3.56
5.17
1.72
2.64
1.32
1.66
0.96
2.23
1.33
1.46
1.71
1.50
2.62
2.90
4.33
2.82
3.63
3.20
25
31
Concrete Lined Channel (miles)

Concrete Lined Channel (percent)
Enclosed Channel (miles)
Enclosed Channel (percent)
1.13
16
3.31
48
1.94
37
1.14
22
1.15
44
1.31
50
0.56
34
0.41
25
0
0
0.73
33
0.46
32
0.38
26
0
0
0.61
40
1.03
32
0.20
7
2.39
85
0.01
1
0
0
0.00
0
9
28
8
27
Proportion of Total Stream Length Assessed (percent)

Proportion Eroding (percent)
0
NA
25
36.3
0
NA
11
25.4
63
62.8
48
53.4
29
39.1
63
62.8
11
0
0
0
20
20
Obstructions
Dam and Drop Structures (number)

Road Crossings Culverts and Bridges (number)
Total Obstructions Road/Rail Crossings, Culverts,
Bridges, Dams, Drop Structures (number/mile)
0
8
0
11
0
3
3
8
1
5
10
9
0
3
1
9
0
14
0
8
15
78
16
15
55
Point Source Outfall Locations
Noncontact Cooling Water Permits (number)

Individual Permits (number)
SSO (number)
CSO (number)
Stormwater Outfalls (number)
Point Source Outlet Totals (number)
Stormwater Outfalls (number/mile)
Point Source Outlets (number/mile)
2
1
2
0
4
9
1.5
3.5
0
0
1
0
13
14
3.7
4.0
3
0
0
0
4
7
1.5
2.7
0
0
0
0
2
2
2.8
2.8
0
0
0
0
1
1
0.4
0.4
0
0
1
0
4
5
3.1
3.8
5
2
7
0
6
20
5.5
18.2
0
0
3
0
9
12
3.1
4.1
4
1
2
6
7
20
2.6
7.4
0
2
0
19
3
24
1.3
10.0
14
6
16
25
53
114
1.7
3.7
Proportion of Total Stream Length that Riparian Buffers

were Assessed (percent)
Riparian Buffers <75 Feet wide (percent)
41
73
47
75
70
79
31
83
88
56
62
100
90
100
100
81
90
100
73
77
84
88
Parameters
a
Riparian Buffers
a
Riparian Buffers continued
Physical, Biological, or Programmatic Component
Watershed
Total
Riparian Buffers >75 Feet wide (percent)
10
19
10
27
23
16
12
Plant Community Assessmentb
FQI Poor (number sites)

FQI Fair (number sites)
FQI Fairly Good (number sites)
Total (number)
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
1
6
Monitoring Stations

Milwaukee River Keepers Thermal
MMSD Surface Water Quality Monitoring Sites
MMSD Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Sites
USGS Level Gauge Stations
USGS Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Sites
Precipitation Gauges
1
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
3
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
3
3
3
8
1
5
0
3
a
Riparian buffer segments includes separate buffer widths for the right bank and left bank.
b
The following qualities were assigned to the Floristic Quality Index (10-19 = Very Poor, 20-29 = Poor, 30-39 = Fair, 40-49 = Fairly Good, 50-59 = Good).
c
Level-1 volunteers conduct periodic stream assessments and measure dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity, flow, and qualitative aquatic invertebrate assessments. Level-2 volunteers are advanced monitors that assess water quality using WDNR equipment and protocols for pH,
dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and temperature (using automated programmable temperature data loggers).
Source: SEWRPC.
Figure 1
TYPICAL STREAM NETWORK PATTERNS BASED
ON HORTONS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Source:
Oliver S. Owen and others, Natural Resource Conservation: Management for a Sustainable Future, and
SEWRPC.
Viewed from above, the network of water channels

that form a river system typically displays a branchlike pattern as shown in Figure 1. A stream channel
that flows into a larger channel is called a tributary of
that channel. The entire area drained by a single river
system is termed a drainage basin, or watershed.
Stream size increases in the downstream direction as
more and more tributary segments enter the main
channel. A classification system based on the position
of a stream within the network of tributaries, called
stream order, was developed by Robert E. Horton and
later modified by Arthur Strahler. In general, the
lower stream order numbers correspond to the smallest headwater tributaries and are shown as the Order 1
or first-order streams in Figure 1. Second-order
streams (Order 2) are those that have only first-order
streams as tributaries, and so on (see Figure 1). As
water travels from headwater streams toward the
mouth of larger rivers, streams gradually increase
their width and depth and the amount of water they
discharge also increases. It is important to note that
over 80 percent of the total length of Earths rivers
and streams are a headwater stream (first- and secondorder), which is also generally characteristic of the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
To better understand stream systems and what shapes

their conditions, it is important to understand the
effects of both spatial and temporal scales. Streams
can be theoretically subdivided into a continuum of
habitat sensitivity to disturbance and recovery time as shown in Figure 2.1 Microhabitats, such as a handful-sized
patch of gravel, are most susceptible to disturbance and river systems and watersheds, or drainage basins, are least
susceptible. Furthermore, events that affect smaller-scale habitat characteristics may not affect larger-scale system
characteristics, whereas large disturbances can directly influence smaller-scale features of streams. For example,
on a small spatial scale, deposition at one habitat site may be accompanied by scouring at another site nearby, and
the reach or segment does not appear to change significantly. In contrast, a large-scale disturbance, such as a
debris flood, is initiated at the segment level and reflected in all lower levels of the hierarchy (reach, habitat,
microhabitat). Similarly, on a temporal scale, siltation of microhabitats may disturb the biotic community over the
short term. However, if the disturbance is of limited scope and intensity, the system may recover quickly to predisturbance levels.2 In contrast, extensive or prolonged disturbances, such as stream channelization due to
ditching and agricultural drainage practices, have resulted in longer term impacts throughout the study area.
The most important fundamental aspects of stream systems are 1) that the entire fluvial system is a continuously
integrated series of physical gradients in which the downstream areas are longitudinally linked and dependent
_____________
1
C.A. Frissell and others, A Hierarchical Framework for Stream Classification: Viewing Streams in a
Watershed Context, Journal of Environmental Management, Volume 10, pages 199-214, 1986.
2
G.J. Niemi and others, An Overview of Case Studies on Recovery of Aquatic Systems From Disturbance,
Journal of Environmental Management, Volume 14, pages 571-587, 1990.
8
Figure 2
RELATION BETWEEN RECOVERY TIME AND SENSITIVITY TO DISTURBANCE FOR
DIFFERENT HIERARCHICAL SPATIAL SCALES ASSOCIATED WITH STREAM SYSTEMS
Source: C.A. Frissell and others, A Hierarchical Framework for Stream Habitat Classification: Viewing Streams in a
Watershed Context, Environmental Management, Vol. 10, and SEWRPC.
upon the upstream areas; and 2) that streams are intimately connected to their adjacent terrestrial setting, that is,
the land-stream interaction is crucial to the functioning of stream ecosystem processes and this connectivity does
not diminish in importance with stream size. In this regard, land uses have a significant impact on stream channel
conditions and associated biological responses.3
Urban Development, Imperviousness, and Hydrology
The Kinnickinnic River watershed is nearly entirely built out and contained about 93 percent urban land in year
2000 (TR No. 39). Urban land use in the Menomonee River watershed is expected to increase from about
64 percent in year 2000 to approximately 76 percent in 2035 (TR No. 39 and PR No. 50). In the absence of
planning, such urbanization can create negative impacts on streams. Urbanization itself is not the main factor
driving the degradation of the local waterbodies. Streams can survive and flourish in urban settings. The main
factors leading to the degradation of urban waterbodies are the creation of large areas of connected impervious
surfaces, the lack of adequate stormwater management facilities to control the quantity and quality of runoff,
_____________
3
Lizhu Wang and others, Influences of Watershed Land Use on Habitat Quality and Biotic Integrity in Wisconsin
Streams, Fisheries, Volume 22, No. 6, June 1997; Jana S. Stewart and others, Influences of Watershed,
Riparian-Corridor, and Reach-Scale Characteristics on Aquatic Biota in Agricultural Watersheds, Journal of
the American Water Resources Association, Volume 37, No. 6, December 2001; Faith A. Fitzpatrick and others,
Effects of Multi-Scale Environmental Characteristics on Agricultural Stream Biota in Eastern Wisconsin,
Journal of the American Water Resources Association, Volume 37, No. 6, December 2001.
9
Table 3
APPROXIMATE PERCENTAGE OF
CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS SURFACES
CREATED BY URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Type of Urban Development
Impervious Surface
(percent)
Two-Acre Residential ..........................

One-Acre Residential ..........................
One-Half-Acre Residential...................
One-Third-Acre Residential .................
One-Fourth-Acre Residential ..............
One-Eighth-Acre Residential ...............
Industrial ..............................................
Commercial .........................................
10-15
15-25
20-30
25-35
35-45
60-70
70-80
85-90
Source:
B.K. Ferguson, Introduction to Stormwater: Concept,

Purpose, Design, New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1998.
proximity of development to waterbodies, loss of

natural areas, and inadequate construction erosion
controls. These factors increase the potential for the
occurrence of the negative water quality/quantity
effects associated with urbanization. Good land use
planning, creative site design, and the application of
best management practices for construction site erosion
control and post-construction stormwater management
can greatly reduce the potential for urban development
to negatively affect the surrounding environment.
Industrial and commercial land uses have significantly
more impervious area than most residential land uses.
Furthermore, smaller residential lots create more
impervious surfaces than larger residential lots.
Table 3 lists the approximate amount of impervious
surfaces created by residential, industrial, commercial,
and governmental and institutional development.
Although commercial and industrial developments create a larger percentage of impervious surfaces, residential
developments, where lawns are the single largest use of land area, present different concerns. Lawns are
considered pervious, but they do show some similarities to impervious surfaces. When lawns are compared to
woodlands and cropland, they are found to contain less soil pore space (up to 15 percent less than cropland and
24 percent less than woodland) available for the infiltration of water. In many instances, considerable soil
compaction occurs during grading activities, significantly reducing the perviousness of lawns. Native grasses,
forbs, and sedges have significantly deeper root systems than turf grass, which loosen the soil and create flow
channels that increase infiltration capacity. Also, owing to excessive application of fertilizers and pesticides on
urban lawns, they typically produce higher unit loads of nutrients and pesticide than does cropland.4
When a new commercial or residential development is built near a stream, the area in driveways, rooftops,
sidewalks, and lawns increases; while native plants and undisturbed soils decrease; and the ability of the
shoreland area to perform its natural functions (flood control, pollutant removal, wildlife habitat, and aesthetic
beauty) is decreased. In the absence of mitigating measures, urbanization impacts the watershed, not only by
altering the ratio between stormwater runoff and groundwater recharge, but also through the changing of stream
hydrology (i.e., increasing stormwater runoff volumes and peak flows and altering the baseflow regime) and
through divergence of the seasonal thermal regimes away from their historical patterns (see Figure 3). These
changes further influence other characteristics of the stream, such as channel morphology, water quality/quantity,
and biological diversity. More specifically, recent research has shown that average flow magnitude, high flow
magnitude, high flow event frequency, high flow duration, and rate of change of stream cross-sectional area were
the hydrological variables most consistently associated with changes in algal, invertebrate, and fish communities.5
When urban development increases, the area of impervious surfaces increases proportionately to the decrease in
the amount of pervious surfaces. For this reason alone, many researchers throughout the United States, including
those at the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR), report that the amount of connected
_____________
4
Center for Watershed Protection, Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Systems, Watershed Protection
Research Monograph No. 1, March 2003, p. 7.
5
Personal Communication, Dr. Jeffrey J. Steuer, US Geological Survey.
10
Figure 3
A COMPARISON OF HYDROGRAPHS
BEFORE AND AFTER URBANIZATION
impervious surfaces is the best indicator of the level

of urbanization in a watershed.6 Connected impervious surfaces have a direct hydraulic connection to a
stormwater drainage system, and ultimately, to a
stream. The studies mentioned above have found that
relatively low levels of urbanization, 8 to 12 percent
connected impervious surface, can cause subtle
changes in physical (increased temperature and
turbidity) and chemical (reduced dissolved oxygen
and increased pollutant levels) properties of a stream
that may lead to a decline in the biological components of the stream. For example, each 1 percent
increase in watershed imperviousness can lead to an
increase in water temperature of about 0.25 degrees
Celsius.7 This temperature increase is small in magnitude, but even this small increase can have significant
impacts to fish and other members of the biological
community.
To some degree, impervious surface impacts can be

mitigated through implementation of traditional
stormwater management practices and emerging green
infrastructure technologies such as pervious pavement, green roofs, rain gardens, bioretention, and
infiltration facilities. Traditional stormwater management practices seek to manage runoff using a variety
of measures, including detention, retention, conveyance, and infiltration. Emerging technologies, in contrast, differ from traditional stormwater practices in
Source: Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group
that they seek to better mimic the disposition of
(FISRWG), Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles,
Processes, and Practices, October 1998.
precipitation on an undisturbed landscape by retaining
and infiltrating stormwater onsite. There are a number
of nontraditional emerging technologies that have
been implemented throughout the greater Milwaukee
watersheds that include disconnection of downspouts, installation of rain barrels, green roofs, and rain gardens, as
well as constructing biofiltration swales in parking lots and along roadways and application of low impact
development (LID) measures. Recent experience has shown that these emerging technologies can be effective.
For example, recent research has demonstrated that bioretention systems can work in clayey soils with proper
sizing, remain effective in the winter, and contribute significantly to groundwater recharge, especially when such
facilities utilize native prairie plants (see Figure 4).8
_____________
6
L. Wang, J. Lyons, P. Kanehl, and R. Bannerman, Impacts of Urbanization on Stream Habitat and Fish Across
Multiple Spatial Scales, Environmental Management, Vol. 28, 2001, pp. 255-266.
L. Wang, J. Lyons, and P. Kanehl, Impacts of Urban Land Cover on Trout Streams in Wisconsin and
Minnesota, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, Vol. 132, 2003, pp. 825-839.
8
Roger Bannerman, WDNR and partners; Menasha biofiltration retention research project, Middleton, WI, 2008;
N.J. LeFevre, J.D. Davidson, and G.L. Oberts, Bioretention of Simulated Snowmelt: Cold Climate Performance
and Design Criteria, Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF), 2008; William R. Selbig and Nicholas
Balster, Evaluation of Turf Grass and Prairie Vegetated Rain Gardens in a Clay and Sand Soil: Madison,
Wisconsin, Water Years 2004-2008, In cooperation with the City of Madison and Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources, USGS Scientific Investigations Report, in draft.
11
Figure 4
WHAT HAS BEEN LEARNED FROM BIORETENTION AND RAIN GARDEN STUDIES?
Source: Roger Bannerman, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and SEWRPC.
In the absence of mitigating measures, one of the consequences of urban development is the increase in the
amount of stormwater, which runs off the land, instead of infiltrating into the groundwater. A parking lot or
driveway produces much more runoff than an undisturbed meadow or agricultural hay field. Depending on the
degree of watershed impervious cover, the annual volume of storm water runoff can increase by up to 16 times
that for natural areas.9 In addition, since impervious cover prevents rainfall from infiltrating into the soil, less flow
is available to recharge groundwater. Therefore, during extended periods without rainfall, baseflow levels are
often reduced in urban streams.10 This has been observed to occur in both the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds. Furthermore, runoff traveling over a parking lot or driveway will pick up more heavy metals,
hydrocarbons, chlorides, bacteria, pathogens, and other stream pollutants than runoff traveling over surfaces that
allow some of the stormwater to be filtered or to infiltrate. Runoff traveling over impervious surfaces bypasses the
filtering action of the soil particles, soil microbes, and vegetation present above (stems and leaves) and below
(roots) the soil surface. For example, as shown in Figures 5 and 6, MMSD staff observed that total phosphorus
and total suspended solids concentrations downstream of stormwater outfalls in the greater Milwaukee River
watersheds were significantly higher during the initial first flush of a rainfall event compared to later samples.
_____________
9
T. Schueler, The importance of imperviousness, Watershed Protection Techniques, Volume 1(3): 100-111,
1995.
10
D. Simmons and R. Reynolds, Effects of urbanization on baseflow of selected south shore streams, Long
Island, NY, Water Resources Bulletin, Volume 18(5): 797-805, 1982.
12
Figure 5
COMPARISON OF TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS AMONG
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS (CSOs), SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS (SSOs), AND
STORMWATER OUTFALL DISCHARGES WITHIN THE GREATER MILWAUKEE WATERSHEDS
Source: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District and SEWRPC.
Figure 6
COMPARISON OF TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS CONCENTRATIONS AMONG
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS (CSOs), SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS (SSOs), AND
STORMWATER OUTFALL DISCHARGES WITHIN THE GREATER MILWAUKEE WATERSHEDS
13
Figure 7
PREDICTED AND OBSERVED CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS AT
70TH STREET WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2008-2009
Figures 5 and 6 also illustrate important points relative to the Inline Storage System, or deep tunnel, that was
constructed by MMSD to reduce the number of sewer overflows: 1) post deep tunnel pollutant concentrations for
combined sewer overflows (CSOs) have improved significantly compared to pre-tunnel conditions, 2) stormwater
pollutant concentrations of total suspended solids associated with the initial first flush during a storm are
equivalent or exceed pollutant concentrations in both CSOs and sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), and 3)
stormwater pollutant concentrations of total phosphorus associated with the first flush are similar, or slightly
greater, than pollutant concentrations in CSOs, but less than SSOs.
Figure 7 illustrate the connection or synergistic relationship between stream flashiness (water quantity) and
pollutant loadings (water quality) associated with urban stormwater runoff. This figure shows how observed
chloride concentrations and predicted concentrations based on associated total conductivity measurements in the
Menomonee River at N. 70th Street fluctuate in response to rainfall events and seasons. It is clear that this
location on the River is impacted by chlorides for extended periods during the winter (December through March).
There are both episodic periods of acute toxicity and extended periods of chronic toxicity at this location during
the winter. Additionally the fish index of biotic integrity score at this location is very poor. A variety of factors
are likely contributing to this result, with chloride concentrations being one of them. Based on this relatively new
real-time information, it is becoming clear that chloride impacts are not short lived; rather chronic toxicity
impacts can last most of the winter depending on snowfall and weather. This same relationship is also likely to be
the case for the Kinnickinnic River.11 In addition, researchers found that the high levels of imperviousness within
_____________
11
Personal communication, Chris Magruder, MMSD.
14
the Honey Creek and Kinnickinnic River watersheds were strongly associated with higher amounts of nonpoint
source pollutants that significantly affect fathead minnow reproductive behavior.12 The most striking results in
this study showed decreased sexual development in males, reduced average egg count by females, and reduced
number of breeding pairs.
Location of impervious surfaces also determines the degree of direct impact they will have upon a stream. There
is a greater impact from impervious surfaces located closer to a stream, due to the fact that there is less time and
distance for the polluted runoff to be naturally treated before entering the stream. A study of 47 watersheds in
southeastern Wisconsin found that one acre of impervious surface located near a stream could have the same
negative effect on aquatic communities as 10 acres of impervious surface located further away from the stream.13
Because urban lands located adjacent to streams have a greater impact on the biological community, an
assumption might be made that riparian buffer strips located along the stream could absorb the negative runoff
effects attributed to urbanization. Yet, riparian buffers may not be the complete answer since most urban
stormwater is delivered directly to the stream via a storm sewer or engineered channel and, therefore, enters the
stream without first being filtered by the buffer. Riparian buffers need to be combined with other management
practices, such as infiltration facilities, detention basins, and grass swales, in order to adequately mitigate the
effects of urban stormwater runoff. Combining practices into such a treatment train can provide a much higher
level of pollutant removal, than single, stand-alone practices could ever achieve. Stormwater and erosion
treatment practices vary in their function, which in turn influences their level of effectiveness. Location of a
practice on the landscape, as well as proper construction and continued maintenance, greatly influences the level
of pollutant removal.
An additional artifact of urbanization is the intentional and unintentional accumulation of trash and debris in
waterways and associated riparian lands, including those within the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds (see Figure 8). These accumulations of trash are unsightly, as well as posing potential human health
concerns. Trash and debris can cause physical and/or chemical (i.e. toxic) damage to aquatic and terrestrial
wildlife. In some cases, historical fill, ranging from abandoned vehicles to gasoline pumps can be found within
the riparian corridors adjacent to the waterways within the Menomonee River watershed.14 Sometimes debris can
accumulate to such an extent that it may limit recreation and the passage of aquatic organisms and/or cause
streambank erosion. Although there has not been a comprehensive survey of trash and debris conditions within
riparian areas of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds, continued efforts to remove trash and debris
within these watersheds by the River Skimmer project, Keep Greater Milwaukee Beautiful, and Milwaukee
Riverkeeper cleanup projects (see Appendix A for list of cleanup sites) indicates that this is an important issue to
consider for the protection of these watersheds.15
_____________
12
D. Weber and R. Bannerman, Relationships between impervious surfaces within a watershed and measures of
reproduction in fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas), Hydrobiologia, Volume 525:215-228, 2004.
13
L. Wang, J. Lyons, P. Kanehl, and R. Bannerman, Impacts of Urbanization on Stream Habitat and Fish Across
Multiple Spatial Scales, Environmental Management, Vol. 28, 2001, pp. 255-266.
14
Eddee Daniels, Urban Wilderness: Exploring a Metropolitan Watershed, University of Chicago Press,
September, 2008.
15
Note: The City of Milwaukee Department of Public Works owns and operates the River Skimmer boat in
partnership with MMSD, the Milwaukee Water Works, the Milwaukee Community Service Corps, and the Port of
Milwaukee. Keep Greater Milwaukee Beautiful and Milwaukee Riverkeeper organize annual river cleanups in the
greater Milwaukee River watersheds. In 2009, volunteers removed hundreds of thousands of pounds of garbage
out of waterways and surrounding land within the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
15
Figure 8
EXAMPLES OF TRASH AND DEBRIS WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER AND KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHEDS
MENOMONEE RIVER (WITHIN REACH MN-19)
HONEY CREEK (WITHIN REACH MN-2)
S. 43RD STREET DITCH (WITHIN REACH KK-2)
EDGERTON CHANNEL (WITHIN REACH KK-4)
Source: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District.
What is Habitat?
Habitat is comprised of a complicated mixture of biological, physical, chemical, and hydrological variables.
Biotic interactions such as predation and competition can affect species abundance and distributions within
aquatic systems, however, such interactions are beyond the scope of this report and are not considered further in
this document. Abiotic factors such as stream flow, channelization, fragmentation of stream reaches, temperature,
dissolved oxygen concentrations, substrates, among others are strong determinants of aquatic communities
(fishes, invertebrates, algae). Therefore, biological community quality is a surrogate for habitat quality. For
example, high abundance and diversity of fishes is strongly associated with high-quality habitat. It is important to
note that habitat quality is intimately related to land use within a watershed, as well as to land use directly
adjacent to the streambank. Consequently, watershed size and associated land use characterization as well as
riparian buffer width are critical elements necessary in defining habitat quality.
16
As noted previously, urbanization increases impervious surface, which can lead to an increase in flashiness (or
the rate at which flow responds to a precipitation event). Such increases in streamflow subsequently affect
streambank stability, streambed stability, pollutant loading, and sediment dynamics, which, in turn, affect habitat
availability and quality. As detailed in TR No. 39, the Menomonee River watershed contains approximately 20
percent imperviousness and the Kinnickinnic River watershed contains about 30 to 40 percent imperviousness
based upon the amount of urban land development in year 2000. Therefore, the hydrology of the urban stream
systems within both watersheds is a major determinant of stream dynamics and is a vital component of habitat for
fishes and other organisms (see Figure 9).
Based upon this information and for purposes of this report, habitat has been divided into two separate elements
that distinguish Land Based versus Instream dimensions of habitat. The land based elements include a
number of features that include existing and planned land use, historical urban growth, stormwater runoff, riparian
buffers, and civil divisions, among others. However, the land based elements addressed specifically in this report
are focused on riparian buffer width and continuity, plant community quality, recreational opportunities, and
groundwater recharge potential within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. Instream measures
addressed in this report include channelization, streambank and streambed stability, channel obstructions,
recreational opportunities, habitat quality, fishery quality, and invertebrate quality.
INVENTORY FINDINGS
Based upon the analysis of physical and biological conditions from data obtained for years 2000 through 2009,
this section summarizes information by stream reaches for the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds as
shown in Tables 1 and 2. This assessment was based upon a total of 94 fish samples, 39 invertebrate samples, and
55 habitat samples collected for a variety of purposes by WDNR staff, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) staff, and
Dr. Robert Anderson of the Wisconsin Lutheran College. These samples were collected for a variety of purposes
and programs that include baseline monitoring by the WDNR, the MMSD Corridor Study Database Project, the
USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) and Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems
(EUSE) projects, and other research projects. It is important to note that the collection methods used were similar
and comparable for purposes of this report. The only samples not used in direct comparison were fisheries
samples collected with mini-boom shocking gear within the downstream reaches of the Menomonee River and
associated shipping canals. These data were used for species presence or absence information only.
Historical Conditions
Early records reveal that the Milwaukee Estuary Area including the Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic
Rivers has been substantially channelized, relocated, dredged, filled, and dammed to convert the significant
wetland complex into the highly constructed navigable port that currently exists.16 This conversion allowed for
the development and growth of the greater Milwaukee metropolitan area that currently exists, but this conversion
has lead to significant environmental degradation in water quality, fisheries, and wildlife habitat.17 Further
comparison of the earliest known survey of the entire Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River systems
completed in 1836 to the present channel conditions in 2005 also shows evidence of significant channelization
and diversion of stream channels over this time period (see Maps 3 and 4).
_____________
16
R. Poff and C. Threinen, Surface Water Resources of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Conservation Department,
Madison, Wisconsin, 1964.
17
Milwaukee River Estuary Area of Concern (AOC), http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/milwaukee.html#pagetop

17
Figure 9
SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM DEPICTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
LAND USE, HYDROLOGY, WATER QUALITY, HABITAT QUALITY, AND ECOLOGICAL HEALTH
Straightening of meandering stream channels or channelization was once a widely used and accepted technique
in agricultural management. The National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly Soil Conservation
Service) cost shared such activities up to the early 1970s within southeastern Wisconsin.18 The objectives of
channelization were to reduce floods by conveying stormwater runoff more rapidly, to facilitate drainage of low_____________
18
Personal Communication, Gene Nimmer, NRCS engineer.
18
Figure 10
EXAMPLES OF A COMBINATION OF CHANNEL ENCLOSURE, CONCRETE
CHANNEL LINING, AND DROP STRUCTURES ENGINEERED FOR FLOODWATER CONTROL
WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER AND KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHEDS
UNDERWOOD CREEK (WITHIN REACH MN-14)
LYONS PARK CREEK (WITHIN REACH KK-1)
lying agricultural land, and to allow more efficient farming in rectangular fields. Through channelization, farmers
attempted to protect their crops by increasing the velocity of water moving downstream and the rate at which
water drained away from their land. However, channelization rarely succeeds in increasing the speed of water
moving downstream for two main reasons; 1) waterways throughout the Southeastern Wisconsin Region often
have low slopes (i.e. slopes less than 1 percent), and 2) the effective slope within a reach that is channelized is
generally not changed, because slope within the channelized section is limited by the streambed elevation of
flatter, downstream reaches. These two factors combined with the fact that channelized reaches are often dredged
too deep and too wide, produce areas that are characterized by slow moving, stagnant waterways. Many
channelized reaches become long straight pools or areas of sediment deposition. Because the velocities within
these reaches are too low to carry suspended materials, sediment particles settle out and accumulate. This is why
many channelized reaches contain uniformly deep flocculent organic sediments. Channelization can also lead to
instream hydraulic changes that can decrease or interfere with surface water contact to overbank areas during
floods. This may result in reduced filtering of nonpoint source pollutants by riparian area vegetation and soils, as
well as increased erosion of the banks. Channelization can lead to increased water temperature, due to the loss of
riparian vegetation, and it can alter instream sedimentation rates and paths of sediment erosion, transport, and
deposition. Therefore, channelization activities, as traditionally accomplished without mitigating features,
generally lead to a diminished suitability of instream and riparian habitat for fish and wildlife.
Historically, prevention of flooding problems has been the major focus of stormwater and floodland management
efforts in urban areas. This has led to channelization (both ditching and straightening), placement of concrete (to
promote conveyance of flood flows and to control flows as in the case of dams, drop structures, and enclosed
channels) as shown in Figure 10, without consideration of habitat impacts in portions of both the Menomonee and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds. Concrete-lined stream segments are particularly damaging, due to the creation of
conditions that 1) fragment and limit linear and lateral connectivity with the stream and their corridor habitat and
ecosystem; 2) limit or prevent fish and wildlife movement; 3) increase water temperature; 4) destroy fish, aquatic
life and wildlife habitat; 5) limit recreational uses, including those attendant to navigation, fishing, and aesthetics;
and 6) may actually increase flooding and decrease public safety if not designed as part of an overall system plan.
Today, recognition of the value of lotic water resources and their multi-faceted contributions to quality of life has
19
Figure 11
UNDERWOOD CREEK FLOOD MITIGATION AND STREAM
RESTORATION PRE- AND POST-CONSTRUCTION
PRE-CONSTRUCTION SHOWING CONCRETE LINED
STREAMBED AND STREAMBANKS
POST-CONSTRUCTION SHOWING RESTORED FLOODPLAIN

CONNECTIVITY AND STREAM CHANNEL: 2009
Source: Thomas R. Sear, Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) and SEWRPC.
lead to programs to restore and recreate naturalized river systems that not only meet flood mitigation
requirements, but also incorporate features related to habitat and maintenance of aquatic life.
MMSD has completed a number of concrete and drop structure removal projects throughout the greater
Milwaukee watersheds over the last decade. The most recent project is located along Underwood Creek as shown
in Figure 11. That project involved removal of both concrete lining and drop structures.19 Stream stabilization and
flooding are important issues that must be addressed when removing concrete lining. Figure 12 shows how
increased stream velocities within a concrete lined section of channel on Lyons Park Creek within the
Kinnickinnic River watershed can impact downstream natural channels and cause excessive streambed and
streambank erosion. This is an example of why streambed and streambanks must be protected after concrete
lining is removed. Protecting the streambed and streambanks with some type of material increases stream channel
roughness relative to a smooth surface like concrete, which slows water down, increasing flood elevations and the
potential risk to nearby structures. To mitigate or offset the potential for increased flood risk, concrete removal
needs to be associated with mitigative measures such as expanding the floodplain to the lands adjacent to the
channel and lowering the ground elevation in the overbanks outside the low- and moderate-flow channel to allow
more room for attenuation and/or conveyance of flood flows. Such measures have the added benefit of decreasing
instream velocities for multiple flood stages and reducing streambed and streambank erosion. Expansion of the
floodplain also allows for the opportunity to restore connectivity with the stream channel, restore native riparian
vegetation, and allow space for a more naturally functioning stream channel, as well as providing stable instream
habitat.
_____________
19
Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Underwood Creek Rehabilitation and Flood Management Project,
Preliminary Design Report, prepared by Tetra Tech, August 2006.
20
Figure 12
Current Conditions
Kinnickinnic River
EXAMPLE OF CHANNEL EROSION
The Kinnickinnic River system is comprised of about
DOWNSTREAM OF CONCRETE LINING ON
30 percent concrete lining and 30 percent enclosed
LYONS PARK CREEK (WITHIN REACH KK-1)
WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED
channel, with most of the remaining open stream
channel unstable and eroding (see Table 2 and
Map 5). A 2004 stream assessment report indicated
that the upper unchannelized sections of the Kinnickinnic River are severely incised (downcut or eroded
streambed) and laterally unstable (see Figure 13).20
Comparison of historic longitudinal profiles indicates
that up to four to five feet of incision has occurred
since the 1970s. This channel instability is due to a
combination of elements that include: a large amount
of urban development and associated impervious area,
a stormwater management system designed to move
runoff quickly and efficiently off the land surface and
into the stream; significant encroachment of urban
development near the stream, which confines flows
Note placement of large stone on the streambed and streambank to
within a narrow area and exposes the streambank and
mitigate excessive erosion due to high velocities.
streambed to extremely high velocities and shear
stresses; and steep slopes. The eroding streambed and
streambank areas as shown on Map 5 should be
addressed. A high degree of bank instability is
associated with extensive areas within the Kinnickinnic River watershed with riparian buffers less than 75 feet in
width (see Table 2 and Map 6). Table 2 shows that more than 70 percent of the river corridors within the
Kinnickinnic River watershed contain buffers that are less than 75 feet in width. The Upper and Middle
subwatersheds of the Kinnickinnic River (KK-3, KK-10) contain the most highly buffered stream reaches with
about 27 and 23 percent, respectively, of the River having buffers greater than 75 feet in width. These areas are
located within Milwaukee County park land, and the Upper Kinnickinnic River also contains two of the six total
highest-quality vegetation communities in the entire watershed based upon their Floristic Quality Index (FQI),21
The Lower Wilson Park Creek (KK-8), Holmes Avenue Creek (KK-5), and Lyons Park Creek (KK-1)
subwatersheds also contain important plant community areas with fair to good-quality, which serve as important
wildlife refuge areas within the highly urbanized landscape (see Table 2 and Map 6). These park lands, natural
areas, and remaining environmental corridors also include areas with the best groundwater recharge potential
within the Kinnickinnic River watershed (see Map 7). Map 7 shows that developed areas are associated with the
lowest groundwater recharge potential; therefore, preservation and, where practical, expansion of open space
would protect, and perhaps enhance, the groundwater recharge potential within the watershed.
_____________
20
Milwaukee County, Milwaukee County Stream Assessment, Final Report, completed by Inter-Fluve, Inc.,
September, 2004.
21
Note that these ratings are approximate indications of plant community quality due to the following potential
limitations: 1)inventories in some cases date back 20 years and may not reflect current conditions and 2) data
collection methods may be different among sites, due to inventories being conducted for multiple purposes or only
partial inventories being conducted. For more information see T. Bernthal, Development of a Floristic Quality
Assessment Methodology for Wisconsin, Final report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V,
June 2003.
21
Figure 13
EXAMPLES OF EXCESSIVE STREAMBED AND STREAMBANK
EROSION CONDITIONS WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED
Stream widths in the Kinnickinnic River were noted as being 42 and 74 feet at the only two cross-sections
obtained by Inter-Fluve, Inc., under a study conducted for Milwaukee County. Stream widths in the remaining
subwatersheds generally ranged from about 10 to 30 feet in width.22 Substrates throughout the Kinnickinnic River
watershed were dominated by gravels and course sands. These large substrate sizes are consistent with high
velocity flows that occur throughout this watershed. However, not much instream physical information exists
within this watershed.
As previously summarized within TR No. 39 there are a total of 61 point sources identified within the
Kinnickinnic River watershed that include permitted noncontact cooling water discharges, permitted individual
discharges, CSO outfalls, and SSO outfalls. As shown in Table 2 these are predominantly located within the
mainstem of the Kinnickinnic River reaches KK-3, KK-10, and KK-11 of the watershed. There are an estimated
53 stormwater outfalls within this watershed, which comprise about 50 percent of the total outfalls observed. The
stormwater outfalls are not concentrated in any particular area, but are widely distributed throughout the
watershed. These outfalls are far more numerous than any other type of outfall in the watershed. In addition, since
these stormwater outfalls discharge during most rainfall events and during periods of snowmelt, as opposed to
only a few events a year when CSOs may occur, their potential for water quality impacts is significant. The
physical outfall pipes themselves can potentially create significant localized erosion to streambed and/or banks,
especially if they are constructed at poor angles in relationship to the flow of the river or stream. These outfalls
can be retrofitted by changing pipe angles, installing deflectors, or shortening pipes, among other strategies. It is
also important to note that these outfalls may provide opportunities for innovative infiltration practices, as well as
protecting streambed and streambanks from erosion. For example, Figure 14 shows two outfalls where infiltration
and streambank protection treatments were constructed as part of the Underwood Creek stream restoration project
in the Menomonee River watershed.
Menomonee River
The Menomonee River system, including tributaries, has about 6 percent concrete-lined channel and 2 percent
enclosed channel (see Table 1). The highest amounts of concrete lined channel are located within the Honey
_____________
22
Ibid.
22
Figure 14
OUTFALL TREATMENTS CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THE UNDERWOOD CREEK
FLOOD MITIGATION AND STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT: 2009
Mixture of rock to
protect from erosion
and promote infiltration
Shallow basin with rock
protection to dissipate high
high energy flows
Grassy swales
Streambank with stone

and fabric protection
NOTE: This project has not yet been completed and more native tree, shrub, and wetland plantings will be implemented in the year 2010.
Source: SEWRPC.
Creek (MN-16) and Underwood Creek (MN-14) subwatersheds. With the exception of the Lilly Creek
subwatershed, the majority of the stream system is in open channel and largely stable, with limited localized areas
of erosion, as shown on Map 8. The streambanks along Lilly Creek and two tributaries (MN-7) are unstable, with
more than 70 percent of the assessed streambanks being classified as eroded, whereas assessed streambanks in the
remaining subwatersheds are generally less than 20 percent eroded. Research has indicated that high-quality
streams have less than 20 percent of their total stream bank lengths severely eroded. Streams with less than
20 percent severe streambank erosion have been found to maintain a high-quality fishery.23 However, all of the
eroding streambed and streambank areas as shown on Map 8 should be addressed, since such erosion may still
cause significant habitat degradation. The relatively small amount of streambed and streambank erosion
is consistent with a high amount of protection from riparian buffers greater than 75 feet in width throughout
the Menomonee River watershed (see Table 1 and Map 9). Table 1 shows that at least 50 percent or more of
the river corridors among the subwatersheds within the Menomonee River watershed are protected by
riparian buffers that are greater than 75 feet in width. However, in the Lilly Creek (MN-7), Little Menomonee
Creek (MN-10), Dousman Ditch (MN-13A), Underwood Creek (MN-14), Honey Creek (MN-16) and
_____________
23
T. D. Simonson and others, Guidelines for evaluating fish habitat in Wisconsin Streams, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, General Technical Report NC-164, 1994.
23
the Lower Menomonee River (MN-18, MN-19) subwatersheds, generally less than 30 percent of riparian buffers
are greater than 75 feet in width and many areas of these streams have no buffers with widths greater than 75 feet.
Like the Kinnickinnic River watershed, these riparian areas are coupled with park systems and are often
associated with high-quality vegetation communities. As shown on Map 9 and Table 1 there are a total of 74
significant vegetation plant communities distributed throughout the Menomonee River watershed that are
components of primary environmental corridors (PEC), natural areas, and critical species habitat areas as
summarized in TR No. 39. These vegetation communities range in quality from poor to excellent based upon their
Floristic Quality Index (FQI),24 which is a measure of plant species diversity and native community composition.
In general, the highest FQI ratings in the good to excellent range are associated with the largest stands of plant
species, but it is important to note that all of these vegetation communities provide necessary habitat for a variety
of wildlife. These park lands, natural areas, environmental corridors, and remaining agricultural lands are
associated with the best groundwater recharge area lands within the Menomonee River watershed (see Map 10).
Since the highest amount of agricultural and open lands are located in the northern portion of the watershed, these
areas are currently providing the greatest amount of groundwater infiltration, helping to sustain stream baseflows.
Map 10 also shows that the developed areas within the watershed are associated with the lowest groundwater
recharge potential. Therefore, preservation and, where feasible, expansion of the open space lands including
agricultural lands would protect, and perhaps enhance, the groundwater recharge potential within the watershed.
Stream widths in the Menomonee River were observed to range from about 20 to 30 feet in the headwaters to
about 70 to 100 feet in the downstream reaches.25 The Menomonee River is generally dominated by gravel and
sand substrates. The Little Menomonee River is dominated by sand substrates and ranges from about 20 to 30 feet
in width. Honey Creek and Underwood Creek are both dominated by gravel substrates and range from about 10 to
40 feet in width. Butler Ditch ranges from about 10 to 25 feet in width and is dominated by sand substrates in the
headwaters and gravel substrates in the lower reaches.
As previously summarized in TR No. 39, there are a total of 153 point sources identified within the Menomonee
River watershed that include permitted noncontact cooling water discharges, permitted individual discharges,
CSO outfalls, and SSO outfalls. As shown in Table 1 these are predominantly located within the lower areas of
the Menomonee River watershed. There are an estimated 236 stormwater outfalls within this watershed, which
comprise about 60 percent of the total outfalls observed. These stormwater outfalls are found throughout the
watershed and, much like in the Kinnickinnic River watershed, there are likely to be more outfalls than identified.
Biological Conditions
The most recent biological assessment of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds identified a strong
relationship between water and aquatic community quality and amount of urban land use.26 For example, median
chloride concentrations among several watersheds throughout the greater Milwaukee metropolitan area tend to
increase with increasing urban development. More specifically, the less developed upper areas of the Menomonee
River watershed (Willow Creek, Upper Menomonee River, Little Menomonee River) contain better water quality
than areas within the more highly urbanized, lower reaches of the Menomonee River watershed (Honey Creek,
Lower Menomonee River) and the entire Kinnickinnic River watershed. However, it is important to note that not
_____________
24
T. Bernthal, Development of a Floristic Quality Assessment Methodology for Wisconsin, Final report to the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V, June 2003.
25
Ibid.
26
J.C. Thomas, M.A. Lutz, and others, Water Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites Within the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, February 2004-September 2005, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific
Investigations Report 2007-5084, 2007.
24
all water quality constituents showed the same pattern in relationship with urban lands. Some showed opposite
responses and some showed no patterns at all, which is similar to what SEWRPC documented in TR No. 39.
Figures 15 and 16 also show the strong negative relationship between fisheries Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) and
Hilsenhoff Biotic Integrity (HBI) quality with increased levels of urbanization among the greater Milwaukee
River watersheds.27
Table 4 shows that the highest-quality fish, invertebrate, and algal communities are located in less developed
watersheds of the greater Milwaukee area including the Upper Menomonee River.28 The poorest biological
communities were associated with the highest urbanized watersheds and include Honey Creek, Underwood Creek,
and the Kinnickinnic River. This is also consistent with observations detailed in the SEWRPC TR No. 39 report.
More specifically, TR No. 39 summarized that the biological community in both the Menomonee River and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds is limited primarily due to 1) periodic stormwater pollutant loads (associated with
increased flashiness); 2) decreased base flows and increased water temperatures due to urbanization; and 3)
habitat loss and continued fragmentation due to culverts, concrete lined channels, enclosed conduits, drop
structures, and past channelization (see Channel Obstructions Section below).
Fish and invertebrate community data from 2000-2009 as shown in Table 5 and Map 8 generally supports the
conclusions summarized above that higher-quality areas are located within less developed areas compared to the
more developed areas of the Menomonee River watershed. However, these recent data also show that where
multiple samples were taken there is a range in both warmwater IBI and intermittent IBI quality throughout the
entire watershed. Although the intermittent IBI is not applicable for larger perennial streams within the watershed,
it was used to provide an assessment for the smaller tributaries and headwater reaches of the larger tributaries to
the Menomonee River. Basically, intermittent headwater streams are associated with less diverse fish assemblage
than perennial larger warmwater stream systems. Therefore, an intermittent IBI assessment will generally provide
a better score when compared to the warmwater IBI assessment. However, although these tributaries may not
necessarily be intermittent streams, an intermittent IBI was used to assess whether or not these urbanized
tributaries were at least functioning as good-quality intermittent systems; the idea being that, given the high
potential for fragmentation of fish passage and species extirpations, it is possible that these tributaries cannot
currently function better than an intermittent stream system. Therefore, comparison of the intermittent IBI versus
the warmwater IBI quality potentially indicates that the majority of the tributaries sampled are functioning as fair
and good intermittent fisheries. It is also important to note that Map 8 shows the maximum quality achieved
within each subwatershed reach throughout the time period from 2000 to 2009, as well as the highest quality
ranking achieved by either the warmwater IBI or intermittent IBI, whichever indicated better quality. Hence,
Map 8 shows the best possible fish community quality achievable within a particular reach, as well as the highest
functional stream assemblage achievable.
In contrast, invertebrate quality throughout the Menomonee River watershed shows that this community is
consistently ranked as good. Since invertebrates tend to colonize or re-establish sooner after a reach has been
disturbed and begins to stabilize, the high proportion of good HBI scores is a potential sign the Menomonee River
watershed may be recovering/improving. Invertebrates as a biotic indicator also tend to show a clearer
relationship to habitat as compared to Fish Indices.29 This also seems to be the case given that the invertebrate
quality ratings are more closely associated with the habitat quality ratings than are the fish ratings. This may also
be a good indication that habitat and food-based organisms are improving and that the fishery may need more
time to recover.
_____________
27
Ibid.
28
Ibid.
29
Personal communications, USGS staff.

25
Figure 15
FISH INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY (IBI) SCORES COMPARED TO PERCENT
URBAN LAND USE AMONG SITES IN THE GREATER MILWAUKEE WATERSHEDS
Source:
U.S. Geological Survey, Water Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites Within the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin, February 2004-September 2005, Scientific
Figure 16
A MODIFIED HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEX (HBI-10) COMPARED TO PERCENT
URBAN LAND USE AMONG SITES IN THE GREATER MILWAUKEE WATERSHEDS
Source:
26
U.S. Geological Survey, Water Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites Within the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District Planning Area, Wisconsin, February 2004-September 2005, Scientific
Table 4
AVERAGE TROPHIC-LEVEL RANKINGS AND AGGREGATE BIOASSESSMENT RANKING
AMONG STREAM SITES WITHIN THE GREATER MILWAUKEE WATERSHEDS: 2004-2005
Average Trophic-Level Ranking
Site
Fisha
Invertebratesb
Algaec
Aggregate
Bioassessment
Ranking
Quartile 1
Milwaukee River near Cedarburg
1.00
1.33
2.00
1.44
Milwaukee River at Milwaukee
2.00
2.67
6.00
3.56
Jewel Creek at Muskego
5.00
6.00
1.50
4.17
Menomonee River at Menomonee Falls
3.00
7.33
4.00
4.78
Quartile 2
Willow Creek at Maple Road near Germantown
4.00
6.17
7.00
5.72
Root River near Franklin
6.00
6.67
8.50
7.06
Root River at Grange Avenue at Greenfield
7.50
11.00
7.00
8.50
Quartile 3
Menomonee River at Wauwatosa
7.50
8.33
10.00
8.61
Oak Creek at South Milwaukee
9.50
7.33
9.50
8.78
Little Menomonee River at Milwaukee
13.00
8.33
6.50
9.28
Honey Creek at Wauwatosa
11.00
8.17
9.00
Quartile 4
Underwood Creek at Wauwatosa
9.39
9.50
10.33
8.50
9.44
Lincoln Creek at N. 47th Street at Milwaukee
13.00
9.67
12.00
11.56
Kinnickinnic River at S. 11th Street at Milwaukee
13.00
11.67
13.50
12.72
NOTE:
IBI = Index of Biotic Integrity; EPT = Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera; HBI = Hilsenhoff Biotic Index. Fill color indicates
quartile of ranking (quartile 1, blue; quartile 2, light blue; quartile 3, light orange; quartile 4, orange; each column is considered
independently).
aAveraged trophic-level rankings included only fish IBI scores.

bAveraged trophic-level rankings included Shannon index of diversity scores, percent of EPT taxa, and HBI-10 scores.
cAveraged trophic-level rankings included percent of most-sensitive diatoms and percent of sensitive diatoms.
Source:
U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Quality Characteristics for Selected Sites within the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District
Planning Area, Wisconsin, February 2004-September 2005, Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5084, 2007.
Table 5 also shows that habitat quality conditions are generally good to excellent within the Menomonee River
watershed. However, there are a few tributaries where habitat was only rated as fair and in one case very poor
(Lower Underwood Creek subwatershed). It is important to note that the habitat ratings within the Lower
subwatershed of Underwood Creek were conducted prior to completion of the concrete removal and
floodplain/channel restoration project (see Figure 11).30 Riparian buffer and instream habitat has been
substantially improved in this portion of Underwood Creek and associated habitat and fisheries quality within this
area are expected to improve, especially after concrete and drop structures downstream of this project are
_____________
30
Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Underwood Creek Rehabilitation and Flood Management Project,
Preliminary Design Report, prepared by Tetra Tech, August 2006.
27
Table 5
FISH, INVERTEBRATE, AND HABITAT QUALITY AMONG REACHES
WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2000-2009
Biological Conditions
Fisheries
Warmwater IBI
Subwatershed
Reach ID

North Branch Menomonee .......................
Upper Menomonee River .........................
West Branch Menomonee River ..............
Willow Creek ............................................
Nor-X-Way Channel .................................
Little Menomonee Creek ..........................
Little Menomonee River ...........................
Lilly Creek ................................................
Butler Ditch ..............................................
Dousman Ditch ........................................
Underwood Creek-Upper .........................
South Branch Underwood Creek .............
Underwood Creek-Lower .........................
Honey Creek ............................................
MN-1
MN-2
MN-3
MN-4
MN-6
MN-10
MN-11
MN-7
MN-8
MN-13A
MN-13
MN-14A
MN-14
MN-16
-Very poor
-Poor-fair
-Poor-fair
Very poor-fair
Good
Very poor
-Very poor-fair
-No fish-fair
Very poor-fair

Lower Menomonee River .........................
MN-5
MN-9
MN-12
MN-17
MN-17A
MN-18
MN-19
Poor-fair
Very poor-good
Fair
Very poor
Very poor-fair
Very poor-fair
N/A
Fisheries
Intermittent IBI
Invertebrates
HBI
--
-Good
Poor-fair
Good
Fair-good
-Poor-fair
-No fish-good
Fair-good
-Fair
Good
Fair-good
-Good
Fairly poor-good
Good
--Fair-good
-Fairly poor-fair
Fair
-Good
Fair-excellent
Fair
Fair-good
-Fair-good
-Very poor-fair
Good
Fair-good
Poor-good
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
-Fairly poor-good
Good
Fair
Fair
Fair-good
N/A
-Poor-excellent
Good
Fair-good
-Fair-good
N/A
Fair
-Good
Habitat Rating
--Fair
Fair
NOTE: The tributary reaches and mainstem reaches are generally ordered from upstream to downstream.
Source: U.S. Geological Survey, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Wisconsin Lutheran College, and SEWRPC.
removed. However, it is important to note that a significant amount of concrete channel will remain in upstream
areas, which will continue to limit the potential overall fishery within the Underwood Creek subwatershed. For
example, the very poor habitat rating within the lower subwatershed of Underwood Creek was associated with the
worst invertebrate rating, as well as the worst fish rating where several samples yielded no fish at all. This
demonstrates that although urban development may be associated with biological degradation, stream channel
conditions such as concrete lining can cause further collapse of the biological quality and severely limit its
ultimate potential for restoration.
Channel Obstructions or Fragmentation
There are nearly 100 potential channel obstructions in the Kinnickinnic River watershed and more than 300 in the
Menomonee River watershed. These structures are primarily associated with road and railway crossings in the
form of culverts and bridges, but obstructions can also include concrete lined channels, drop structures, debris
jams, and beaver dams. These obstructions can form physical and/or hydrological barriers to fisheries movements,
which can severely limit the abundance and diversity of fishes within stream systems.31 Not all road or railway
crossings are limiting fish passage in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds, but many of these
_____________
31
T.M. Slawski, and others, Effects of low-head dams, urbanization, and tributary spatial position on fish
assemblage structure within a Midwest stream, North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 2008.
28
Figure 17
Figure 18
CONCRETE LINING IN THE MENOMONEE RIVER

WATERSHED NEAR THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY
BRIDGE FROM RIVER MILE 3.62 TO 4.24 (SEE TABLE 6)
MENOMONEE FALLS DAM IN THE

MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED AT
RIVER MILE 21.93 (SEE TABLE 6)

Source: SEWRPC.
structures have not been assessed for fish passage and it is not known which of these structures are limiting the
fishery. However, the section of concrete lining near Miller Park (River Mile 3.62 to 4.24), as shown in Figure 17,
and the Menomonee Falls dam (River Mile 21.9), as shown in Figure 18, are two of the most significant fish
passage obstructions on the Menomonee River (see Table 6). The Menomonee Falls dam is a complete barrier to
upstream fish passage. This particular reach also contains bedrock outcrops resulting in natural falls (see Map 8).
These outcrops have probably limited fish passage upstream both historically and currently, so the upper reach of
the Menomonee River may have always been rather isolated from the downstream areas, even before construction
of the dam. The upper approximately 1,000 feet of the concrete lining from River Mile 3.62 to 4.24 along the
lower reach of the main stem limits fish passage due to the occurrence of supercritical flows at high velocities in
combination with no resting areas (see Figure 19). Similarly, the concrete lining within the lower reach of the
Kinnickinnic River (KK-10) also limits fish passage due to its length, lack of habitat, lack of adequate water
depths, high velocities, and flashiness.
As summarized in TR No. 39, there has been an apparent loss of multiple fish species throughout the Menomonee
River and Kinnickinnic River watersheds over the last 100 years. However, it is important to note that this loss of
species has been disproportionately greater among reaches that are further away from a connection with Lake
Michigan. For example, comparison of historic (pre-2000) versus current (post-2000) fish species abundance
within the Kinnickinnic River indicates that species abundance has been and continues to be much greater in the
most downstream reach (KK-11) connected to the Milwaukee River estuary and Lake Michigan compared to any
other areas in the watershed (see Table 7). This indicates that the poor habitat, hydrology, and water quality
conditions primarily associated with concrete lining as shown in Figure 20 continue to severely limit fisheries
within this watershed. Table 4 confirms that the Kinnickinnic River contains the poorest fish, invertebrate, and
algal communities among the greater Milwaukee watersheds. In fact, only two native fish species have been
found to occur within this watershed since the year 2000 (see Table 7). However, due to its connection with the
Estuary and Great Lakes system, the lower reach of the Kinnickinnic has the greatest potential for fishery
improvement. That factor, combined with the completion of the removal of 167,000 cubic yards of contaminated
29
Table 6
FISH SPECIES COMPOSITION AMONG REACHES IN THE
MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 1902-1999 VS 2000-2009
Reaches
MN-1, 2, 3, 4, 5
MN-6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,

12, 13, 13A, 14, 14A,
16, 17, 17A, Portion of 18
Portion of MN-18, MN-19
Reach above
Menomonee Falls Dam
at River Mile 21.93
Reach from Menomonee

Falls Dam at River
Mile 21.93 to Concrete
Lining at River Mile 4.24
Reach from Concrete

to Confluence with the
Milwaukee River
Entire Watershed
Years Sampled
Years Sampled
Years Sampled
Years Sampled
Species According to Their

Relative Tolerance to Pollution
1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
Intolerant
Blackchin Shiner .................................
Blacknose Shiner ................................
Brook Trout .........................................
Greater Redhorsea .............................
Least Darterb ......................................
Redside Daceb ...................................
Rock Bass ...........................................
Smallmouth Bass ................................
Spottail Shiner.....................................
----X
-----
X
X
--------
-X
--X
X
----
--------X
---X
------
--X
X
--X
X
--
-X
-X
X
X
--X
X
X
X
X
--X
X
X
Intermediate
Black Bullhead ....................................
Black Crappie......................................
Bluegill ................................................
Brassy Minnow....................................
Brook Stickleback ...............................
Brown Bullhead ...................................
Brown Trout ........................................
Central Stoneroller ..............................
Channel Catfish ..................................
Chinook Salmon..................................
Coho Salmon ......................................
Common Shiner ..................................
Emerald Shiner ...................................
Fantail Darter ......................................
Gizzard Shad ......................................
Golden Redhorse ................................
Grass Pickerel.....................................
Hornyhead Chub .................................
Johnny Darter .....................................
Lake Sturgeonb...................................
Largemouth Bass ................................
Largescale Stoneroller ........................
Longnose Dace ...................................
Northern Pike ......................................
Northern Redbelly Dace ......................
Pearl Dace ..........................................
Pumpkinseed ......................................
Rainbow Trout.....................................
River Carpsucker ................................
Round Goby ........................................
Sand Shiner ........................................
Shorthead Redhorse ...........................
Silver Redhorse ..................................
Southern Redbelly Dace .....................
Spotfin Shiner .....................................
Stonecat..............................................
Threespine Stickleback .......................
Walleye ...............................................
Yellow Perch .......................................
X
-X
X
X
--X
---X
-X
---X
X
-X
---X
X
X
------X
------
X
-X
-X
X
-X
---X
------X
-X
--X
-X
X
--------X
X
---
X
-X
X
X
X
X
X
---X
-X
--X
X
X
-X
X
-X
X
X
X
-X
-X
--X
----X
X
X
X
-X
--X
X
--X
X
X
--X
X
X
-X
-X
X
-X
X
---X
-------X
X
-X
-----------X
X
----X
-----X
-----------X
X
X
X
---X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-X
X
-X
X
X
X
X
-X
--X
X
-X
-X
X
-X
--X
X
X
-X
X
X
X
X
X
---X
-X
X
X
X
X
X
-X
X
-X
X
X
X
-X
-X
--X
----X
X
X
X
-X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-X
X
X
-X
X
X
X
-X
X
X
X
X
Tolerant
Blacknose Dace ..................................
Bluntnose Minnow...............................
Central Mudminnow ............................
X
X
X
-X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
----
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
30
Table 6 (continued)
Reaches
MN-1, 2, 3, 4, 5
MN-6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,

12, 13, 13A, 14, 14A,
16, 17, 17A, Portion of 18
Portion of MN-18, MN-19
Reach above
Menomonee Falls Dam
at River Mile 21.93
Reach from Menomonee

Falls Dam at River
Mile 21.93 to Concrete
Reach from Concrete

to Confluence with the
Milwaukee River
Entire Watershed
Years Sampled
Years Sampled
Years Sampled
Years Sampled

1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
Tolerant (continued)
Common Carp.....................................
Creek Chub .........................................
Fathead Minnow .................................
Golden Shiner .....................................
Goldfish...............................................
Grass Carp .........................................
Green Sunfish .....................................
White Sucker.......................................
Yellow Bullhead ..................................
X
X
X
X
--X
X
--
X
X
X
X
--X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-X
X
--
X
X
X
X
X
-X
X
--
X
-----X
X
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-X
X
--
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Total Number of Species
24
24
35
30
12
42
39
54
Total Native and Gamefish Species
23
22
33
28
11
38
37
50
Total Nonnative Species
Total Intolerants
14
13
22
19
26
24
35
10
10
12
10
12
Total Intermediate
Total Tolerant
aDesignated threatened species.
bDesignated Species of special concern.
sediment from the Kinnickinnic River between Becher Street and Kinnickinnic Avenue in 2009 under the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)/WDNR Kinnickinnic River Environmental Restoration Project,
makes it much more likely that fish species utilization will increase within this lower part of the system.32
In contrast, historic fish assemblages within the lowest reach of the Menomonee River (4.24 miles) contained the
fewest number of species (12) as compared to the upstream areas that were comprised of more than twice as many
fish species. However, the lower reach of the Menomonee River was only recently reconnected with the
Milwaukee River estuary and Lake Michigan when the Falk dam was completely removed in 2001. In addition,
removal of the North Avenue dam on the Milwaukee River at the upstream end of the Milwaukee Harbor estuary
and major habitat improvements near the dam site that were completed in 1996 has also contributed to a
significant increase in abundance and diversity of fishes in the Milwaukee River, Menomonee River, and estuary
areas. These efforts combined with several instream restoration enhancements, as well as fish stocking programs
have also contributed to the highest ever recorded number of total species (42) found within the Menomonee
River in over 100 years of fishery surveys.
_____________
32
USEPA, Kinnickinnic River cleanup means a revitalized Milwaukee neighborhood, News Release 09OPA221, http://epa.gov/greatlakes/sediment/legacy/kk/index.html, November 2, 2009.
31
Figure 19
MMSD has completed a number of stream restoration

and enhancement projects over the last several
ADULT SALMON MIGRATING FROM LAKE MICHIGAN
decades that have lead to significant improvements
TRYING TO SWIM THROUGH THE EXCESSIVE
in water quality and instream habitat, as well as
VELOCITIES WITHIN THE CONCRETE LINING OF THE
MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED DOWNSTREAM
improved fish passage.33 For example, a restoration
OF RIVER MILE 4.24 (SEE MAP 8 AND TABLE 6)
project along the Menomonee River in Hoyt Park
stabilized the streambed and streambank, as well as
lowered (excavated) the adjacent lands to reconnect
the riparian lands with the stream system as shown in
Figure 21. This reconnection with the floodplain
protects the streambanks from erosion by allowing
water to flow outside the banks and into the riparian
areas, reducing velocities by distributing flow over a
greater area. Instream fisheries habitat and fish
passage were improved as part of the removal of
concrete lining and the drop structure within the
Menomonee River near N. 43rd Street and W. State
Street as shown in Figure 22. These and other projects, such as restoration by the USEPA of the reach of
the Little Menomonee River associated with the
Moss-American Superfund Site in Milwaukee County
or restoration of the Dretzka Park Tributary associated
with Wisconsin Department of Transportation
(WisDOT) roadway improvements from N. 124th
Street to W. Brown Deer Road (STH 100) in the
Village of Menomonee Falls have contributed to improvements in water, habitat, and fishery quality within the
Menomonee River watershed.34 More specifically, the WisDOT project led to restoration of more than 1,200
linear stream feet of stream channel and an associated eight-acre wetland mitigation/restoration project, which
resulted in a significant improvement in fish species diversity (two to three times increase in species richness) and
abundance (three to 13 times increase in fish abundance). This restored area currently accounts for the highestquality of fish assemblages, based upon samples taken, within the MN-9 subwatershed area (see Map 8).
Construction of this roadway improvement project was completed in 2001 and the fishery and habitat assessment
was completed in 2008,35 which demonstrates that the stream system can respond positively to improvements in
stream hydrology, habitat, and associated riparian corridors and those improvements can lead to a sustained
improvement in the fishery.
_____________
33
Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, Menomonee River Phase 2 Watercourse Management Plan,
prepared by Tetra Tech, August 2002.
34
USEPA, Cleanup Nears Completion in Little Menomonee River, Moss-American Superfund Site, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, http://www.epa.gov/region5/sites/mossamerican/, December 2007; and SEWRPC Staff Memorandum,
Village of Menomonee Falls, Waukesha CountySurvey Data, Analysis, and Recommendations Relating to the
Proposed Relocation of Dretzka Park Tributary to the Menomonee River Under the Jobs Corridor Project,
August 1999.
35
The N. 124th Street and W. Brown Deer Road WisDOT roadway improvement project won the national 2001
Globe Award for excellence in environmental protection and mitigation for exceeding regulatory compliance by
incorporating principles of stream ecology into a stream relocation design.
32
Table 7
FISH SPECIES COMPOSITION AMONG REACHES IN THE
KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 1902-1999 VS 2000-2009
Reaches
KK-4, KK-5,
KK-6, KK-7, KK-8
KK-1, KK-2, KK-3, KK-10
KK-11
Upstream
Confluence of
Wilson Park Creek with
the Kinnickinnic River
Upper
Kinnickinnic River
to River Mile 2.81
Lower Kinnickinnic
River Downstream of
Concrete Lining
(approximately River
Mile 2.81 at 6th Street) to
confluence with Milwaukee
Harbor Estuary
Entire Watershed
Years Sampled
Years Sampled
Years Sampled
Years Sampled

1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
1902-1999
2000-2009
Intolerant
Greater Redhorsea .............................
Redhorse Species ...............................
Smallmouth Bass ................................
----
----
----
----
X
X
--
--Xb
X
X
--
--Xb
Intermediate
Alewife ................................................
Black Bullhead ....................................
Brassy Minnow....................................
Brook Trout .........................................
Brown Trout ........................................
Brook Stickleback ...............................
Chinook Salmon..................................
Coho Salmon ......................................
Common Shiner ..................................
Gizzard Shad ......................................
Johnny Darter .....................................
Northern Pike ......................................
Orangespotted Sunfish .......................
Pumpkinseed ......................................
Rainbow Trout.....................................
Striped Shinerc ...................................
Threespine Stickleback .......................
Yellow Perch .......................................
Walleye ...............................................
-----X
----X
-X
-------
--------------------
--X
------------X
----
--------X
-----------
X
X
----X
X
-X
-X
-X
X
-X
---
---Xb
Xb
---Xb
Xb
--Xb
Xb
X
X
X
--X
X
X
-X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
---
Tolerant
Banded Killifishd .................................
Common Carp.....................................
Creek Chub .........................................
Fathead Minnow .................................
Golden Shiner .....................................
Goldfish...............................................
Green Sunfish .....................................
White Sucker.......................................
--X
X
-----
---------
X
----X
---
---X
-X
---
-X
X
X
X
X
X
X
---------
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
---X
-X
---
Total Number of Species
18
8b
24
11
Total Native and Gamefish Species
14
8b
20
10
-Xb
----Xb
--Xb
-Xb
-X
--Xb
--Xb
--Xb
Xb
Total Nonnative Species
Total Intolerants
1b
Total Intermediate
7b
14
Total Tolerant
aDesignated threatened species.

bThese species were estimated to be potentially present based upon a recent creek survey of the Lower Milwaukee River and Estuary adjacent to the Lower
Kinnickinnic River as summarized in the WDNR, Milwaukee and Menomonee River Creek Survey Report, PUB-FH-514-2008, January 2006.
cDesignated endangered species.
dDesignated species of special concern.
Source: U.S. Geological Survey, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and SEWRPC.
33
Figure 20
CONCRETE LINING IN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER
WATERSHED WITHIN REACH KK-10
Comparison of current fish assemblages among

reaches within the Menomonee River shows that the
middle reach (River Mile 4.24 to 21.9) and upper
reach (upstream of River Mile 21.9) contained 35 and
24 total fish species, respectively. Although the
concrete-lined channel between River Miles 3.62 and
4.24 and the Menomonee Falls dam are significant
factors affecting fish species diversity as discussed
above, the fisheries data indicate that fish assemblages
are less diverse in stream reaches that are farther away
from Lake Michigan. Therefore, reduction of fragmentation or reconnection of stream reaches within
the Menomonee River is a critical aspect to address
for consideration in development of a sustainable
fishery with this watershed.
Existing Water Quality Monitoring Information

There is considerable ongoing surface water
monitoring within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic
River watersheds as shown on Maps 11 and 12,
respectively. The current distribution and location of
monitoring sites includes a variety of continuous
water quality monitoring stations, instantaneous water
quality sites, water level gauges, water temperature
sites, and precipitation gauges (see also Tables 1
and 2). The Menomonee River watershed currently
has a total of 34 total monitoring stations and the
Kinnickinnic River watershed has a total of 26 stations. The majority of the water quality data is being
collected by MMSD, the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), WDNR, and volunteers affiliated with the Milwaukee Riverkeepers Citizen Based Monitoring program.
These data are managed by each of the agencies and are publicly accessible through the USGS, the MMSD
Corridor Database and the WDNR SWIMS and Fish and Habitat databases.
MMSD continues to collect and analyze physical and chemical samples bi-monthly at 11 mainstem and 14
tributary sites on the Menomonee River, as well as six mainstem and two tributary sites on the Kinnickinnic
River. Measurements are taken for inorganic, organic, bacteriological, and instantaneous water quality
parameters. The MMSD contributes funds for the operation of flow gaging stations by the USGS on the
Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River and some of their associated tributaries.
The MMSD and USGS have also established six real-time water quality monitoring stations throughout the
Menomonee River watershed and one site on the mainstem of the Kinnickinnic River (see Maps 11 and 12).
Using remote sensor technology, MMSD and USGS are measuring real-time specific conductance, water
temperature, dissolved oxygen and turbidity along with stream flow and stage, and applying regression models to
estimate concentrations of suspended solids, suspended sediment, chloride, fecal coliform and E. coli under a
variety of seasonal, temporal, and flow conditions. The real-time sensors are connected to data-collection
platforms which transmit data in parallel to MMSD and USGS public websites. Access to this information on a
real-time basis allows for water resources management decisions and provides information for citizens to see
water quality conditions throughout the Menomonee River watershed.
34
Figure 21
RESTORATION OF EXCESSIVE STREAMBANK AND STREAMBED EROSION AND
RECONNECTION OF FLOODPLAIN WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER AT HOYT PARK
BEFORE
AFTER
The Milwaukee Riverkeeper staff trains and manages numerous volunteers who conduct Citizen Based
Monitoring efforts in the watershed. They currently have seven Level-1 sites, 13 Level-2 sites, and 15 temperature
monitoring locations throughout the mainstem and tributary areas of the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic
River watersheds.
Their monitoring program was launched in 2006 and they currently have 58 volunteers monitoring sites
throughout the greater Milwaukee River watersheds. Volunteers are trained at two levels. Level-1 volunteers
conduct periodic stream assessments and measure dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity, flow, and qualitative
aquatic invertebrate assessments. Level-2 volunteers are advanced monitors that assess water quality using
WDNR equipment and protocols for pH, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and temperature (using automated
programmable temperature data loggers). Volunteers generally monitor on at least a monthly basis, and data is
entered into either the WDNR SWIMS or Water Action Volunteer (WAV) databases.
These ongoing data collection efforts have and will continue to provide a sound basis for the assessment of
current and future water quality conditions and high-quality data to evaluate the effectiveness of water pollution
control measures, to detect new and emerging water quality problems, and to help decision makers manage these
systems.
35
Figure 22
PRE- VERSUS POST- CONCRETE CHANNEL AND DROP STRUCTURE
REMOVAL/STREAM RESTORATION NEAR N. 43RD STREET AND
W. STATE STREET ALONG THE MENOMONEE RIVER
36
Chapter III
WATERSHED TARGETS, OBJECTIVES,

AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a strategic framework for decision-making and project prioritization for the purposes of 1)
protecting and improving recreation, water quality, and fisheries and 2) cost-effectively and efficiently
implementing projects to meet those improvement goals. Although not mutually exclusive, the recommended
prioritization strategies are different for Land-Based versus Instream-Based Measures as summarized below. The
differences in prioritization strategies are related to the fundamental differences potentially limiting the aquatic
versus terrestrial community and habitat quality within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
However, each of these prioritization strategies is based upon the main premise of protecting the existing quality
areaseither within water or on landand expanding those areas through reconnection of stream-miles and/or
acres of land to reduce fragmentation.
Land-Based Measures
This prioritization is similar to the Three-Tier Instream fisheries approach, and is designed to focus on protecting
the existing highest-quality terrestrial wildlife habitat areas as well as expanding riparian corridors to preserve
instream quality for the short- and long-term. Prioritization for improving riparian corridors should be based upon
improvement in ecosystem structure and function where possible. Such improvements include protection of
groundwater recharge areas, expansion of existing corridor widths and/or connection to high-quality wildlife and
critical species habitat areas (see Maps 6, 7, 9, and 10). It is also recommended that this prioritization build upon
considerable prior open space planning efforts that include: environmental corridors delineated by the Regional
Planning Commission; the open space preservation elements of adopted County park and open space plans; the
MMSD Green Seams Conservation Plan, Greenway Connection Plan; and, the recently completed River
Revitalization Foundation Menomonee River Mainstem Land Protection Plan.1 It is important to note that a key
consideration in the identification of priority areas includes consideration of maintaining or expanding stormwater
management and flood control benefits, which is consistent with the goals of this report. In addition,
_____________
1
SEWRPC Planning Report No. 42 (PR No. 42), A Regional Natural Areas and Critical Species Habitat Protection
and Management Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin, September 1997; SEWRPC Planning Report No. 48 (PR
No. 48), A Regional Land Use Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin: 2035, June 2006; SEWRPC Memorandum
Report No. 152 (MR No. 152), A Greenway Connection Plan for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District,
December 2002; and Kristen Wilhelm and Jason Schroeder, River Revitalization Foundations Menomonee River
Mainstem Land Protection Plan 2008-2009, 2009.
37
lands currently held in public ownership by the State, counties, cities, villages, towns, and nongovernmental
organizations form the structural framework for prioritization of the land-based measures from which to expand
protections. The high-priority lands for the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River watersheds are shown on
Maps 13 and 14, respectively. The high-priority lands identified to be protected represent a synthesis of recommendations from multiple planning efforts and they include open lands in public or public interest ownership
identified in the regional land use plan (SEWRPC PR No. 48) and in the River Revitalization Foundation
Menomonee River Land Protection Plan, MMSD conservation areas identified in SEWRPC MR No. 152, open
space areas identified to be protected through public land use regulation (MR No. 152), groundwater recharge
areas,2 high-quality plant community areas (SEWRPC PR No. 42), and riparian buffers adjacent to streams with
less than 75 feet of buffer width (SEWRPC PR No. 50 and TR No. 39) (see Maps 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, and 14).
Instream-Based Measures
This framework is based upon a three-tiered approach, focused on the reconnection of waterways that have been
historically isolated from the Lake Michigan stream system through construction of dams, roadways, and flow
control structures, or modified through construction of single-purpose systems, such as stormwater conveyances.
As indicated in Figures 23 and 24, the three components of this strategy are:
Tier 1Restoring connectivity and habitat quality between the mainstem waterways and the Lake
Michigan endpoint,
Tier 2Restoring connectivity and habitat quality between the tributary streams and the mainstems of
the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers, and
Tier 3Expanding connection of highest-quality fish, invertebrate, and habitat sites within each of the
watersheds as shown on Maps 5 and 8.
The third tier is a catch-all that enables stakeholders to link the goals of habitat restoration and improvement of
recreational options with ongoing activities throughout each watershed. This strategic element provides the
flexibility for communities and stakeholders to take advantage of opportunities throughout each watershed that
may arise independently of the primary strategy of restoring linkages with Lake Michigan and tributary streams.
An example of this latter strategic approach would be using the opportunity provided by scheduled reconstruction
of area roadways to remove obstructions or modify channelized stream segments that might not fully conform to
the first two strategic priorities. To this end, it is further noted that provision of fish passage will provide passage
for other aquatic organisms such as invertebrates.3 By providing restored connectivity, and associated habitat, it is
envisioned that implementation of this plan will not only further the purpose of establishing a sustainable fishery
but also enhance human economic opportunities and recreational and aesthetic values associated with the
waterways of the greater Milwaukee watersheds.
It is fully recognized that within this framework opportunities will arise that should be acted upon. For example,
even though it is a general principle of this strategy that activities progress from downstream to upstream, the
completion of an action in headwaters areas or on a tributary stream should not be passed up or ignored simply
because it does not conform to the downstream to upstream strategy. Rather, all opportunities should be seized as
they become available. However, where multiple opportunities exist, and where limited funds are available, this
strategic framework is intended to assist decision-makers in allocating resources where they would be most
appropriate and effective in achieving the goals of the regional water quality management plan update.
_____________
2
SEWRPC Planning Report No. 52, A Regional Water Supply Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin, in progress.
D.M. Vaughan, Potential Impact of Road-Stream Crossings (Culverts) on the Upstream Passage of Aquatic
Macroinvertebrates, U.S. Forest Service Report, March 21, 2002.
38
Figure 23
INSTREAM THREE-TIER PRIORITIZATION STRATEGY WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED
Source: SEWRPC.
39
Figure 24
INSTREAM THREE-TIER PRIORITIZATION STRATEGY WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED
Source: SEWRPC.
The Tier 1 prioritization is based upon the understanding that Lake Michigan is the most diverse resource and
greatest asset that both the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River systems have for the potential to restore and
maintain a sustainable fishery. This prioritization is also based upon the understanding that within River systems
the widest and deepest downstream areas are generally associated with a greater abundance and diversity of fishes
compared to narrower and shallower upstream areas.4 For example, as shown in Tables 6 and 7 in Chapter II of
this report, those portions of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers connected with Lake Michigan through the
Milwaukee Harbor estuary contain the most diverse fish assemblages. This observation is also consistent with the
most diverse fish assemblages being found within the downstream reaches of the Milwaukee River that were
_____________
4
I.J. Schlosser, A conceptual framework for fish communities in small warmwater streams, pages 17-24 in W.J.
Matthews and D.C. Heins (editors), Community and Evolutionary Ecology of North American Stream Fishes,
University of Oklahoma Press, 1987.
40
connected with Lake Michigan through removal of the North Avenue dam as described in TR No. 39. Position
within a stream network also is an important determinant of fish species assemblage structure with greater
abundance and diversity generally associated with tributary streams located in lower portions of the stream
network.5 Therefore, the highest priority, or Tier 1, approach focuses on restoring continuity of passage and
habitat restoration for native fishes on the mainstems of the Menomonee River (MN-19 through MN-5) and
Kinnickinnic River (KK-11 through KK-3) from downstream at Lake Michigan to their headwaters upstream as
shown in Figures 23 and 24, respectively. This approach is designed to redevelop the fishery through reconnection and restoration of the strongest determinants of overall fish species diversity and assemblage structure,
namely Lake Michigan and the tributary networks and their associated habitats from downstream to upstream.
The Tier 2 prioritization is based upon the understanding that through their connection with Lake Michigan the
mainstems of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers are the most diverse resources and greatest assets that
their tributaries have for the potential to restore and maintain a sustainable fishery. Tributary streams that are
connected to, as opposed to being not fragmented from, the associated mainstem of stream systems have a greater
potential for increased fish abundance and diversity via access to feeding, rearing, and spawning, as well as refuge
from thermal stress or low-water periods.6 Hence, the second tier approach is focused on addressing fish passage
continuity and habitat quality from the tributary streams to the mainstems of the Menomonee River and
Kinnickinnic Rivers. The Tier 2 prioritization component is illustrated graphically in Figures 23 and 24.
The Tier 3 approach is designed to focus on improving fish passage and habitat quality throughout the entire
watershed. Prioritization of projects to improve the fishery quality should be based upon where fish passage
obstructions have been identified to be a problem and where improvement in ecosystem structure and function
can be attained. Factors to be considered include connection to one or more tributaries, length of stream between
structures, and/or connection to high-quality fish and habitat areas as indicated in Table 8 for the Menomonee
River watershed. A similar table was not developed for the Kinnickinnic River watershed because fish passage
and habitat quality improvements cannot begin until substantial removal of concrete channel segments and drop
structures is accomplished and the channels are rehabilitated within this system. It is recommended that these
structures and crossings be examined at the time of replacement or major modification with the intent of
minimizing the numbers of crossings, and improving crossings to eliminate barriers to fish migration. Further, it is
anticipated that new development or redevelopment may provide opportunities for interventions that do not
conform to the first and second tier approaches. These opportunities should not be ignored; rather, where there are
opportunities to enhance passage of fish and aquatic organism and/or to improve instream habitat, and where
funds can be obtained, it is recommended that actions be taken to enhance fish and aquatic organism passage and
habitat quality throughout the river systems.
RECOMMENDED LAND-BASED HABITAT PROTECTION ACTIONS

The following subsections are structured to indicate a habitat protection feature, such as riparian buffers; to
identify a target to achieve relative to that feature; and to discuss issues, key questions, objectives, recommended
actions needed to meet the target, and potential quantifiable measures related to the target.
_____________
5
L.L. Osborne and M.J. Wiley, Influence of tributary spatial position on the structure of warmwater fish
communities, Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Volume 49: 671-681, 1992.
6
T.M. Slawski and others, Effects of tributary spatial position, urbanization, and multiple low-head dams on
warmwater fish community structure in a Midwestern stream, North American Journal of Fisheries
Management, Volume 28: 1020-1035, 2008.
41
42
Table 8
FISH PASSAGE ASSESSMENT AT ROAD CROSSING STRUCTURES, CALCULATED STREAM LENGTH
BETWEEN STRUCTURES, AND BIOLOGICAL (FISH, INVERTEBRATE) AND HABITAT QUALITY DETERMINATIONS
AMONG MAINSTEM AND TRIBUTARY REACHES WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2000-2009
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Structure Identification
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0250
--
--
--
--
0.0300
--
--
--
--
0.3000
---
- -a
- -a
---
---
0.2150
--
--
--
--
0.3525
--
--
--
--
0.1875
--
--
--
--
0.7650
--
--
--
--
0.0375
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.1300
--
--
--
--
0.5385
--
--
--
--
0.1390
--
very poor
good
--
0.3850
---
fair
fair
fair
fair
fair
good
0.0800
--
--
--
--
0.1800
--
--
--
--
0.2230
--
--
--
--
0.0620
--
--
--
--
0.3600
--
--
--
--
0.1700
--
--
--
--
Menomonee River Mainstem

Menomonee River-Lower
MN-19W
0.025
No
C.M. St. P.&P. Railroad
0.055
0.15
0.23
0.355
No
N. Plankinton Avenue
No
N. 6th Street
0.57
No
IH 94
0.9225
No
Emmber Lane/Muskego Avenue
1.11
No
N. 16th Street
1.875
No
C.M. St. P.&P. Railroad
1.9125
No
Canal Street
1.9525
No
Canadian Pacific Railway
1.9725
No
2.1025
No
N. 27th Street
2.641
2.71
2.78
2.91
3.11
3.165
No
S. 35th Street
No
Pedestrian bridge
No
South access road
3.245
No
Pedestrian bridge
MN-18
3.425
3.615
3.648
3.71
4.07
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
North access road

Begin concrete lining
IH 94
W. Bluemound Road
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.1980
--
--
--
--
0.0120
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.0630
--
--
--
--
0.0160
--
--
--
--
0.1920
--
--
--
--
0.3240
--
--
--
--
0.5350
--
--
--
--
0.2700
--
--
--
--
0.1400
---
fair
very poor
fair
good
good
good
0.2100
--
--
--
--
0.3900
--
very poor
fair
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.3400
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.3300
--
--
--
--
0.0100
--
--
--
--
0.1400
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.1300
--
--
--
--
Menomonee River Mainstem (continued)

(continued)
MN-18
(continued)
4.24
Yes
Canadian Pacific Railway-end

concrete lining
4.438
No
Pedestrian bridge
4.45
Unknown
N. 45th Street
4.56
Unknown
4.623
Unknown
USH 41 (northbound)
4.639
Unknown
USH 41 (southbound)
4.831
No
5.155
Unknown
5.69
No
Pedestrian bridge
Hawley Road
Pedestrian bridge
5.9625
6.06
6.09
6.1025
6.24
6.3135
Unknown
Unknown
N. 70th Street
Confluence with Honey Creek
Bike trail bridge
6.7025
Unknown
6.7215
Unknown
Harwood Avenue pedestrian bridge
6.78
Unknown
Harmonee Avenue
Unknown
N. 68th Street
MN-17A
6.8895
No
Bike trail bridge
7.23
Yes
Ford-#5
7.34
Yes
Obstruction-#4
7.67
Yes
Obstruction-#3
7.6805
No
Footbridge
7.82
Yes
Paved ford-#2
7.87
Yes
Obstruction-#1
43
44
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.3100
--
--
--
--
0.0100
--
--
--
--
--
--
--

(continued)
MN-17A
(continued)
MN-17
Menomonee River-Upper
MN-12
8.0025
Unknown
Swan Boulevard
8.314
No
Golf course bridge
8.325
8.37
8.5015
Yes
Unknown
Paved ford
Confluence with Underwood Creek
W. North Avenue
8.62
9.6805
Unknown
W. Burleigh Street (eastbound)
9.6835
Unknown
W. Burleigh Street (westbound)
10.28
Yes
10.671
Unknown
N. Mayfair Road (northbound)
10.674
Unknown
N. Mayfair Road (southbound)
10.9
Unknown
Pedestrian bridge
10.94
Unknown
Private drive
11.041
Unknown
Golf course bridge
11.202
11.22
12.05
12.41
12.521
Unknown
W. Capitol Drive
Unknown
W. Hampton Avenue (eastbound)
12.524
Unknown
W. Hampton Avenue (westbound)
12.883
Unknown
Confluence with Little

Menomonee River
USH 45
13.423
Unknown
Railroad
13.523
Unknown
N. 124th Street
13.8
13.89
14.41
14.643
Unknown
Pedestrian bridge
Unknown
Confluence with Butler Ditch

W. Silver Spring Drive
12.57
0.1800
Underwood Creek
1.1800
--
very poor
fair
good
0.0030
--
--
--
--
0.6000
--
--
--
--
0.3900
--
--
--
--
0.0000
--
--
--
--
0.2300
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.1600
--
--
--
--
1.3200
----
poor
---
-fair
fair
fair
---
0.0030
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Limestone ford
0.3600
Little Menomonee
River
0.5400
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.2800
--
--
--
--
0.8400
-Butler Ditch
fair
good
fair
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.3200
--
fair
Good
--
1.0200
--
--
--
--
0.5700
--
--
--
good
0.7500
--
--
--
--
0.9200
--
--
--
--
0.1900
--
--
--
--
0.2400
--
--
--
--
0.0800
--
--
--
--
0.0300
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
poor
--
good

(continued)
MN-9
14.72
14.963
Unknown
Railroad
15.983
15.99
16.55
Unknown
W. Mill Road
Unknown
W. Appleton Avenue
17.303
Unknown
W. Good Hope Road
18.22
Unknown
Private bridge
18.41
Unknown
Private bridge
18.65
Unknown
Private bridge
18.73
Unknown
Private bridge
18.76
Unknown
Private bridge
18.81
Unknown
Private bridge
18.85
Unknown
Private bridge
18.95
18.98
19.703
19.78
20.21
20.3
20.81
Unknown
Private bridge
Confluence with Lilly Creek
Lilly Road
Unknown
Unknown
No
Pedestrian bridge
Confluence with Nor-X-Way Channel
Pedestrian bridge
45
21.093
21.17
21.443
Unknown
Pilgrim Road
Unknown
Arthur Avenue
21.75
Yes
Limestone drop
21.82
No
Pedestrian bridge
21.907
Yes
Main Street-Menomonee Falls dam
22.073
Unknown
Roosevelt Drive
22.17
22.44
22.68
22.683
Unknown
Private bridge
Unknown
Private Drive
0.7500
Lilly Creek
0.5100
--
0.6000
Nor-X-Way
--
--
--
0.2800
--
--
--
--
0.3500
--
poor
good
excellent
0.3100
--
--
--
--
0.0700
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.1700
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.5100
---
very poor
--
-fairly poor
fair
--
46
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.5000
--
--
--
--
0.2500
--
--
--
--
0.8500
--
--
--
--
--
--
--

(continued)
MN-5
23.179
Unknown
River Crest Road
23.433
Unknown
County Line Road (CTH Q)
24.282
24.7
24.803
Unknown
Unknown
Private drive
Confluence with Willow Creek
USH 41/45
25.233
25.34
25.893
Unknown
Lilac Avenue
Unknown
Mequon Road
25.943
Unknown
River Drive
26.536
Unknown
Private drive
26.883
27.12
Unknown
Railroad
Confluence with West Branch
MN-1
27.133
27.135
27.253
27.87
27.873
Unknown
Freistadt Road
Unknown
STH 145
Unknown
Railroad/Confluence with
North Branch
28.663
Unknown
Pleasant View Drive
28.913
Unknown
Lovers Lane Road
0.5200
Willow Creek
0.4300
--
--
--
--
0.6600
--
fair
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.5900
--
--
--
--
0.3500
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
0.2500
West Branch
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
fair
fair
--
0.6200
--
--
--
--
0.7900
--
--
--
--
0.2500
--
--
--
--
0.4600
--
--
--
--
0.0300
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
0.3400
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
good
fair
good
0.3000
--
--
--
--
0.1900
--
--
--
--
0.2900
--
--
--
--
Menomonee River Tributary Subwatersheds

Honey Creek
MN-16
0.032
Unknown
Bike trail bridge
0.15
Unknown
Honey Creek Parkway Drive
0.49
0.577
0.59
Unknown
W. Portland Avenue
Unknown
0.89
Unknown
W. Wisconsin Avenue
1.08
Unknown
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.4200
--
--
--
--
0.1600
--
--
--
--
2.3300
--
--
--
--
0.2400
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.4200
--
--
--
--
0.1600
--
--
--
--
0.2400
--
--
--
--
0.1800
--
--
--
--
0.2600
--
--
--
--
0.2200
--
--
--
--
0.3700
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.3900
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.1300
--
--
--
--
0.3300
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.2250
--
--
--
--
0.5800
--
--
--
--
0.0100
--
--
--
--
0.4600
--
good
fair
excellent
0.1900
--
poor
--
fair
Menomonee River Tributary Subwatersheds (continued)

Honey Creek (continued)
Underwood Creek
MN-16
(continued)
MN-14 and
MN-13
1.37
Unknown
1.79
Unknown
S. 84th Street
1.9491
Yes
IH 894 tunnel outlet
4.2767
Yes
W. Arthur Avenue tunnel inlet
4.515
Unknown
McCarty Park footbridge
4.62
Unknown
W. Beloit Road
5.04
Unknown
S. 76th Street
5.2
Unknown
W. Oklahoma Avenue
5.436
Unknown
S. 72nd Street
5.6144
Yes
5.878
Unknown
W. Morgan Avenue
6.1
Unknown
S. 68th Street
Channel drop structure
6.4722
Yes
W. Howard Avenue (downstream)
6.524
Yes
W. Forest Home Avenue (upstream)
6.9121
Yes
S. 60th Street (downstream)
7.012
Yes
S. 60th Street (upstream)
7.14
Unknown
W. Cold Spring Road
7.47
Unknown
IH 43/894
0.225
Yes
0.805
Yes
0.8125
Unknown
1.27
Unknown
N. Mayfair Road
47
48
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0000
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.0300
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.1800
--
--
--
--
fair
fairly poor
fair

Underwood Creek (continued)
MN-14 and
MN-13
(continued)
1.46
Yes
1.462
Unknown
Union Pacific Railroad
1.5
Unknown
Watertown Plank Road
1.535
Yes
1.635
Yes
1.695
Yes
1.8725
Unknown
N. 115th Street
2.5725
Unknown
Confluence with South Branch

Underwood Creek
UPS Driveway
2.5805
Unknown
Pedestrian bridge
2.6725
Unknown
Private drive
2.6925
Unknown
Private drive
2.7325
Unknown
Private drive
2.8325
Unknown
Private drive
3.1025
Unknown
3.1225
Unknown
Private drive
3.2525
Unknown
Wall Street
3.311
Yes
Parking Lot tunnel outlet
3.41
Yes
Parking Lot tunnel inlet
3.4325
Unknown
Watertown Plank Road
3.505
Unknown
Private drive
3.54
Unknown
Private bridge
3.5525
Unknown
0.7000
2.56
South Branch
Underwood Creek
0.0100
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.2700
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.1300
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.0700
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.0100
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.7200
--
--
--
--
0.3400
---
poor
fair
fair
good
fair
good
0.6600
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.2900
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.0700
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.0100
--
--
--
--
0.0800
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.0020
--
--
--
--
--
--
--

Underwood Creek (continued)
MN-14 and
MN-13
(continued)
3.6725
Unknown
Juneau Boulevard
3.7625
Unknown
Elm Grove Village Hall bridge
4.4825
4.67
4.74
4.8225
Unknown
Marcela Drive
Unknown
North Avenue
5.4825
Unknown
Private drive
5.5925
Unknown
Clearwater Road
5.881
Unknown
Private bridge
5.9925
Unknown
Santa Maria Court
6.0825
Unknown
Woodbridge Road
6.2025
Unknown
Indian Creek Parkway
6.3215
Unknown
6.37
Unknown
Private bridge
6.41
Unknown
Private bridge
6.48
Unknown
Private bridge
6.5
Unknown
Private bridge
6.5125
Unknown
Private drive
6.59
Unknown
Private bridge
6.6425
Unknown
Private drive
6.6825
Unknown
Pilgrim Parkway
6.685
6.95
7.2385
Unknown
Unknown
Pedestrian bridge
Confluence with Dousman Ditch
Wirth Park bridge
7.685
Unknown
0.5500
Dousman Ditch
0.4500
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
49
50
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0525
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.4200
--
--
--
--
0.5100
--
--
--
--
0.6500
--
--
--
--
0.0040
--
--
--
--
0.2800
--
--
--
--
0.0300
--
--
--
--
0.1400
--
--
--
--
0.4300
--
--
--
--
0.6300
--
--
--
--
0.3600
--
--
--
--
0.2300
--
--
--
--
0.5200
--
--
--
--
0.0700
--
--
--
--
0.0880
--
--
--
--
0.4200
--
--
--
--
0.6200
--
--
--
--
0.3300
--
--
--
--
0.0300
--
poor
fairly poor
excellent
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.8100
--
--
--
--
0.1700
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--

South Branch Underwood Creek
Dousman Ditch
Little Menomonee River
MN-14A
0.0525
Unknown
W. Bluemound Road
0.1525
Unknown
0.5725
Unknown
IH 94
1.081
1.662
1.726
1.73
Yes
W. Schlinger Avenue tunnel outlet
Yes
W. Greenfield Avenue tunnel inlet
0.028
Unknown
0.06
Unknown
North Avenue
0.2
No
MN-13A
Pedestrian bridge
0.625
Unknown
Gebhardt Road
1.258
Unknown
Private drive
1.62
Unknown
Private drive
1.847
Unknown
Private drive
2.369
Unknown
Lake Road
MN-11
0.088
Unknown
N. Lovers Lane Road (STH 100)
0.51
Unknown
Pedestrian bridge
1.126
Unknown
W. Silver Spring Drive
1.46
1.47
1.485
Unknown
Unknown
Bike trail bridge
1.589
Unknown
W. Appleton Avenue
2.402
Unknown
W. Mill Road
2.567
Unknown
W. Fond du Lac Avenue (STH 145)
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.7300
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.3000
--
--
--
--
0.0700
--
--
--
--
0.4600
--
--
--
--
0.6200
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
1.1600
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.3800
--
--
--
--
0.2600
--
--
--
--
0.3900
--
--
--
--
0.1900
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.2600
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
0.3900
---
fair
fair
good
fair
fair
fair
--
--
--
--
--
--

(continued)
MN-11
(continued)
2.603
Unknown
W. Leon Terrace
3.33
Unknown
Park bridge
3.3835
Unknown
Bike trail bridge
3.685
Unknown
W. Good Hope Road (CTH PP)
3.76
Unknown
N. Granville Road (CTH F)
4.215
Unknown
W. Calumet Road
4.835
Unknown
W. Bradley Road
4.92
Unknown
Wisconsin & Southern Railroad
6.075
Unknown
6.125
Unknown
W. Brown Deer Road (STH 100)
6.5
Unknown
Park bridge
6.76
Unknown
Footbridge
7.15
Unknown
W. County Line Road
7.34
Unknown
Private bridge
7.45
Unknown
Private bridge
7.71
Unknown
Farm bridge
7.83
7.92
8.21
8.22
8.31
Unknown
Private bridge
9.07
Unknown
Donges Bay Road

Confluence with Little
Menomonee Creek
Private bridge
9.365
Unknown
Mequon Road
Unknown
0.8500
0.3000
Little Menomonee
Creek
--
51
52
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
1.0200
--
--
--
--
0.2900
--
--
--
--
0.2900
--
--
--
--
0.2400
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.0700
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
0.8600
---
good
good
good
good
good
good
0.3600
--
--
--
--

(continued)
Little Menomonee Creek
Willow Creek
North Branch Menomonee River
MN-11
(continued)
MN-10
9.38
Unknown
Private bridge
9.425
Unknown
Farm bridge
10.44
Unknown
Freistadt Road
0.29
Unknown
Private bridge (0.29)
0.58
Unknown
0.8225
Unknown
Granville Road
0.84
Unknown
0.91
1.03
1.0325
1.16
1.47
1.89
Unknown
Unknown
Mequon Road
Unknown
2.2525
Unknown
Freistadt Road
MN-4
0.0625
Unknown
Maple Road
0.6525
Unknown
Lannon Road
1.1525
Unknown
Appleton Avenue (STH 175)
MN-1
0.6315
Unknown
Holy Hill Road
1.05
Unknown
1.2725
Unknown
Rockfield Road
1.6015
Unknown
Division Road
1.8315
Unknown
Railroad
0.0100
--
--
--
--
0.0625
--
--
--
--
0.5900
--
good
fair
fair
0.5000
--
good
good
fair
1.7000
--
--
--
--
0.6315
--
--
--
--
0.4200
--
--
--
--
0.2200
--
--
--
--
0.3300
--
--
--
--
0.2300
--
--
--
--
1.0600
--
--
--
--
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.4700
--
--
--
--
0.7200
--
--
--
--

North Branch Menomonee River
(continued)
West Branch Menomonee River
Lilly Creek
MN-1
(continued)
2.895
Unknown
Maple Road
3.365
Unknown
STH 145
4.085
Unknown
Goldendale Road
MN-3
0.3315
Unknown
Freistadt Road
0.3915
Unknown
Private drive
0.51
Unknown
1.1625
Unknown
Maple Road
1.2525
Unknown
Railroad
1.6325
Unknown
Private drive-bridge
2.0525
Unknown
Private drive-bridge
2.225
Unknown
Dalebrook Road
2.335
Unknown
Goldendale Road
2.525
Unknown
Freistadt Road
2.745
Unknown
Goldendale Road
3.015
Unknown
Goldendale Road
3.285
Unknown
USH 41/45
3.305
Unknown
Hilltop Drive
MN-7
Unknown
0.4015
--
--
--
--
--
fair
good
fair
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
0.6500
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.3800
--
--
--
--
0.4200
--
--
--
--
0.1700
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.1900
--
--
--
--
0.2200
--
--
--
--
0.2700
--
--
--
--
0.2700
--
--
--
--
0.0200
--
--
--
--
0.3000
--
--
--
--
0.4015
--
--
--
--
0.4400
--
--
--
--
0.2200
--
--
--
fair
0.4100
--
good
good
fair
0.3300
--
--
--
--
Appleton Avenue
Unknown
0.8425
0.85
1.0625
1.07
1.469
0.4400
0.3315
Good Hope Road

Unknown
Brentwood Drive
Unknown
Daylily Drive
Unknown
53
54
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0800
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.1700
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.0700
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.3800
--
--
--
--
0.4700
--
--
--
--
0.0725
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.1000
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.1400
--
--
--
--
0.2800
--
--
--
--
0.0900
--
--
--
--
0.4900
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.7500
--
--
--
--

Lilly Creek (continued)
MN-7
(continued)
1.8025
Lilly Road
Unknown
1.8825
Mill Road
Unknown
1.99

Unknown
2.05

Unknown
2.1125
Private drive
Unknown
2.2025
Private drive
Unknown
2.2625
Private drive
Unknown
2.43
Kaul Avenue
Unknown
2.48
Bobolink Avenue
Unknown
2.5525
Private drive
Unknown
2.5925
Railroad
Unknown
2.9725
Silver Spring Road

Unknown
Nor-X-Way Channel
MN-6
0.0725
Unknown
Fond du Lac Avenue
0.1325
Unknown
USH 45 entrance ramp
0.1725
Unknown
USH 45
0.2725
Unknown
Stanley Drive
0.3125
Unknown
Main Street
0.4525
Unknown
Patrita Drive/Fountain Boulevard
0.7325
Unknown
Private drive
0.8225
Unknown
1.3125
Unknown
STH 145
1.3725
Unknown
County Line Road (CTH Q)
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0800
--
--
--
--
0.3000
--
--
--
--
0.1500
--
--
--
--
0.5600
--
--
--
--
0.0600
--
--
--
--
0.2400
--
fair
--
good
0.4100
--
--
--
--
0.2600
--
--
--
--
0.1200
--
--
--
--
0.3300
--
fair
--
--
0.4100
---
good
poor
---
fair
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.9100
South Branch Butler

Ditch
--
--
--
0.6900
--
--
--
--

Nor-X-Way Channel (continued)
Butler Ditch
Dretzka Park Creek
MN-6
(continued)
MN-8
2.12
Unknown
Railroad
2.2
Unknown
Railroad
2.495
Unknown
Culvert at upstream end of pond
2.645
Unknown
Donges Bay Road
3.205
Unknown
Wasaukee Road
0.23
0.24
Unknown
Campbell Road
0.645
Unknown
Overview Drive
0.9
Unknown
Private bridge
1.0225
1.03
1.3525
1.36
1.49
1.7625
Unknown
Hampton Road
Unknown
Lisbon Road
Unknown
Lilly Road
1.81
2.5
Unknown
2.715
Unknown
Lilly Heights dam

Confluence with South Branch
Butler Ditch
Shamrock Lane
3.405
Unknown
Lisbon Road
MN-9
0.0531
Unknown
Fond du Lac Avenue
0.13
Unknown
USH 41/45 downstream
0.31
Unknown
USH 41/45 upstream
0.492
Unknown
W. Bradley Road
0.662
Unknown
Golf course bridge #1
0.788
Unknown
0.5900
--
--
--
--
0.0530
--
--
--
--
0.0770
--
--
--
--
0.1800
--
--
--
--
0.1820
--
--
--
--
0.1700
--
--
--
--
0.1260
--
--
--
--
0.1300
--
--
--
--
55
56
Table 8 (continued)
Subwatershed
Reach
River
Mile
Fish
Passage
Obstruction
Distance
between
Structures
(river miles)
Major
Tributaries
Fish
Sites
(2000-2009)
Invertebrate
Sites
(2000-2009)
Habitat
Sites
(2000-2009)
0.0670
--
--
--
--
0.1640
--
--
--
--
0.0325
--
--
--
--
0.0610
--
--
--
--
0.0930
--
--
--
--
0.0350
--
--
--
--
0.1100
--
--
--
--
0.0730
--
--
--
--
0.3000
--
poor
--
poor
0.1800
--
good
--
excellent
0.1500
--
fair
--
good
0.3700
--
--
--
--
0.0500
--
--
--
--
0.1700
--
--
--
--
0.0400
--
--
--
--
0.4800
--
--
--
--
0.0750
--
--
--
--

Dretzka Park Creek (continued)
NOTE:
MN-9
(continued)
0.918
Unknown
0.985
Unknown
1.149
Unknown
1.1815
Unknown
1.242
Unknown
1.335
Unknown
1.3695
Unknown
1.475
Unknown
1.5475
1.66
1.845
1.89
2.02
2.04
2.17
Unknown
Unknown
N. 124th Street
2.54
Unknown
Private drive
2.585
Unknown
Abandoned railroad
2.755
Unknown
2.795
Unknown
Railroad
3.275
Unknown
W. County Line Road
No
N. 124th Street
No
W. Brown Deer Road
The tributary reaches and mainstem reaches are generally ordered from upstream to downstream.
Quality Rating
aNo quality could be assigned to this site due to the sampling methods.
Fish Sites
Invert Sites
Habitat Sites
very poor
fairly poor
very poor
poor
fair
poor
fair
good
good
fair
good
excellent
Riparian Corridors
Healthy riparian corridors help to protect water quality, groundwater, fisheries and wildlife, and ecological
resilience to invasive species, as well as reducing potential flooding of structures and harmful effects of climate
change.7 In turn, the health of riparian corridors is largely dependent upon width (size) and continuity. Therefore,
efforts to protect and expand the remaining riparian corridor width and continuity are the foundation for
protecting and improving the fishery and recreation within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
Corridor Target 1
Expand riparian buffer width to a minimum of 75 feet.
Issue
All riparian buffers provide some level of protection that is greater than if there were no buffer at all. In addition,
wider buffers provide a greater number of functions (infiltration, temperature moderation, species diversity) than
narrower buffers. Therefore, it is important that existing buffers be protected and expanded where possible and
not be converted to urban land uses, which could lead to increased degradation to the fishery, water quality,
wildlife, and recreational opportunities of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
Key Questions
What are the major human uses in the area?
Where do they generally occur in the watershed (map the location of important uses such as
recreational facilities, public access points, and trails)?
What impacts are the uses having, and what opportunities are there to reduce those impacts?
What needs or opportunities are there related to human uses or facilities in terms of meeting
management objectives and moving toward desired conditions in the watersheds?
Objective
The objective is to protect, preserve, and expand riparian buffer width to a minimum of 75 feet where possible
among mainstem and tributary waterways throughout the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River systems.
Recommended Actions
The following actions, or combinations of those actions, should be considered in identifying opportunities for
establishment or expansion of riparian buffers:
Encourage the establishment of setback requirements to accommodate shoreland buffers, use of

appropriate and environmentally friendly landscaping practices, and inclusion of stormwater
management measures that provide water quality and water quantity benefits.
Use public lands or purchase lands identified on Maps 13 and 14 through donation, grants, fee simple
purchase, or acquisition of conservation easements.
Implement management activities to promote restoration.
_____________
7
N.E. Seavy and others, Why Climate Change Make Riparian Restoration More Important than Ever:
Recommendations for Practice and Research, Ecological Restoration, Volume 27(3): pages 330-338, September,
2009; Association of State Floodplain Managers, Natural and Beneficial Floodplain Functions: Floodplain
ManagementMore Than Flood Loss Reduction, 2008, www.floods.org/NewUrgent/Other.asp.
57
Conduct additional surveys to determine riparian buffer widths along streams for which inventories
have not yet been conducted.
Effect changes in zoning ordinances to minimize the adverse effects of urban development by
providing specific provisions and incentives for the clustering of development on smaller lots within
conservation subdivisions, thus preserving significant portions of the open space within each property
or group of properties considered for development, and minimizing the footprint of the developed
area relative to the open space on and around a development site.
Potential Measures
Stream-miles inventoried and area of potential buffer identified.
Stream-miles with buffer width of 75 feet or greater preserved or established.
Volume of historic fill and/or tons of trash removed from riparian areas.
Area of native wetland or upland reconstructed.
Number of native species restored.
Area of exotic invasive species removed.
Corridor Target 2
Expand riparian buffer continuity (connectedness).
Issue
Fragmentation of riparian buffers by roads, railways, and utilities combined with encroachment by development
impacts the structure and function of riparian corridors and their ability to adequately protect waterways and
wildlife habitat. Stream crossings tend to have a cumulative impact on the stream and associated lands and on the
quality of water and the fishery.
Objective
The objective is to reduce the linear fragmentation of the existing riparian buffers by either removing crossings
where possible or at least not increasing the number of crossings of waterways within the Menomonee and
Kinnickinnic River systems, where practical. The human safety need to preserve access by police, fire protection,
and emergency medical services is an overriding consideration that must be applied in determining whether the
objective of removing a crossing is feasible. This objective is only meant to apply to situations where more road
crossings exist than are necessary to ensure adequate access for emergency services.
Recommended Actions
The following actions, or combinations of those actions, should be considered in identifying opportunities to
expand riparian buffer continuity:
58
Use of public lands or purchase lands identified on Maps 13 and 14 through donation, grants, fee
simple purchase, or acquisition of conservation easement.
Implement management activities to promote restoration.
Implement management activities to promote recreation.
Removal of nonessential roads where appropriate.
Potential Measures
Stream-miles of continuous buffer widths of 75 feet or greater preserved or established.
Number of stream channel crossings and/or impediments to flow removed and/or retrofitted to restore
continuity of riparian buffers.
Increase in number of locations of safe public access for recreational use of streams.
Corridor Target 3
Protection of high-quality areas or environmentally sensitive lands.
Issue
The existing plant communities, natural areas, and critical species habitat areas are the most vital wildlife areas
remaining within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds, and those areas need to be protected. Such
areas help provide local and regional ecological resilience within these largely urbanized watersheds. In addition,
protection of primary and secondary environmental corridors, isolated natural resource areas, and groundwater
recharge areas throughout the two watersheds should also be a priority.
Key Questions
What plant/animal communities or species are in decline or are considered rare on the landscape?
How do the current conditions compare with reference or desired conditions, and how do these relate
to human activities in the watershed?
How might the current conditions affect future land management objectives and strategies, and what
can be done to bridge the gap between current and desired conditions?
What is the relative abundance and distribution of species of concern that are important in the
watershed (Threatened or Endangered Species, Management Indicator Species, Species of Special
Concern, Birds of Conservation Concern)?
What is the distribution and character of the plant and animal habitats?
What activities could occur to improve riparian habitat conditions and improve wildlife habitat
conditions?
What needs and opportunities are there for habitat protection, maintenance, or enhancement?
Objective
Protect and manage environmentally sensitive lands to maximize native plant and animal biodiversity as well as
groundwater recharge.
Recommended Actions
protect high-quality areas or environmentally sensitive lands:
Protect wetlands, woodlands, and groundwater recharge areas through land use regulation, public land
acquisition via donation or purchase, establishment of conservation easements on critical lands,
and/or possible expansion of environmental corridors. These protections are recommended for the
priority lands indentified on Maps 13 and 14 within the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds, respectively.
59
Wetland areas, many of which have been historically modified or filled, are currently largely
protected through the existing regulatory framework provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
permit program, State wetland zoning requirements, and local zoning ordinances. Many wetland
areas in the watersheds are included in the environmental corridors delineated by the Regional
Planning Commission and protected under one or more of the existing Federal, State, county, and
local regulations. Consistent and effective application of the provisions of these regulations is
recommended.
Certain wetland and woodland areas have been identified for acquisition in the adopted regional
natural areas and critical species habitat protection and management plan.8 Implementation of these
recommendations, in addition to those set forth in the adopted park and open space plan for
Milwaukee County,9 would complement the protection and preservation of environmentally sensitive
lands.
Consider adopting and enforcing municipal shoreland setback requirements and should actively
enforce construction site erosion control and stormwater management ordinances.
Provide informational materials to shoreland property owners.
Enforce local zoning regulations to discourage development within the one-percent-annualprobability floodplain.
As a refinement of the recommendations of the regional water quality management plan update,
specific candidate sites for restoration of native wetland and/or upland prairie communities have been
identified as shown on Maps 13 and 14. Those lands should be purchased or easements should be
obtained, and the lands should ultimately be restored through modification of agricultural drainage
systems, removal of nonnative exotic invasive species, removal of historical fill, and/or establishment
of native vegetation, among other best management practices.
Conduct additional surveys to inventory environmentally sensitive lands.
Purchase lands to expand buffers within the SEWRPC-delineated primary and secondary
environmental corridors, especially along the river mainstems and tributary streams.
Potential Measures
Stream-miles inventoried and area of potential buffer identified.
Stream-miles or area of land protected.
Continued enforcement of local shoreland and floodplain zoning ordinances.
_____________
8
SEWRPC Planning Report No. 42, A Regional Natural Areas and Critical Species Habitat Protection and
Management Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin, September 1997.
9
SEWRPC Community Assistance Planning Report No. 137, A Park and Open Space Plan for Waukesha County,
December 1989; SEWRPC Community Assistance Planning Report No. 132, A Park and Open Space Plan for
Milwaukee County, November 1991.
60
Information Needs
Conduct wildlife species surveys to identify high-quality riparian buffer and/or environmental corridor lands
throughout the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. These areas would then become the focus of
protection and reconnection with possible additional corridor lands.
Maintain current inventories on riparian buffer conditions and widths throughout the watersheds and expand
riparian buffer inventories within tributaries not assessed.
Hydrology
Urban development brings with it significant changes in the landscape. These changes historically have included
modification of the drainage pattern, hardening of surfaces, and alteration of infiltration, all of which can affect
water quality and quantity. All of these changes generally increase the volume and rate of runoff from
precipitation events. Historically, managing these increases in rates and volumes of runoff would often involve
construction of storm sewer and/or open channel systems to convey stormwater as quickly and efficiently as
possible to the streams of the watersheds, and ultimately to Lake Michigan. In recent years, however, flooding,
water quality impairment, and environmental degradation have demonstrated the need for an alternative approach
to stormwater management. Consequently, current stormwater management practices seek to manage runoff using
a variety of measures, including detention, retention, infiltration, and filtration, better mimicking the disposition
of precipitation on an undisturbed landscape.
Hydrology Target 1
Moderate flow regimes to decrease flashiness.
Issue
Urbanization increases the area of impervious surfaces, which can lead to an increase in flashiness (or the rate
at which flow responds to a precipitation event) and can subsequently affect streambank and streambed stability,
pollutant loading, and sediment dynamics, which, in turn, affect habitat availability and quality. Therefore,
increased flashiness has been determined to be a cause of degradation of aquatic communities.
Key Questions
What beneficial water resource uses occur in the watershed, and how are these affected by stormwater
management practices?
Which water quality parameters are critical to a healthy aquatic ecosystem?
What are current water quality conditions, and are there any problem areas?
How is water quality being affected by types of land use?
Objective
The objective is to emulate stream discharges in response to rainfall to levels observed prior to urbanization or
agricultural development to the extent practical. More specifically, decreases in average flow magnitude, high
flow magnitude, high flow event frequency, and/or high flow duration are sought to provide potential
improvements to the algal, invertebrate, and fish communities within the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic
River watersheds. Significant reductions in streamflow rates and volumes would be difficult to achieve in either
of these extensively developed watersheds; however, opportunities for reductions may exist in the headwaters
areas of the Menomonee River watershed.
Recommended Actions
moderate flow regimes and decrease flashiness:
61
Manage stormwater runoff to meet, to the maximum extent practicable, the agricultural performance
standards and the nonagricultural standards for existing development, new development, and
redevelopment as established under Chapter NR 151, Runoff Management, of the Wisconsin
Administrative Code. The objectives of the first tier and second tier approaches would be to ensure
that new development and redevelopment conform to the water quantity and quality control
requirements of Chapter NR 151 and the MMSD Chapter 13 rule, Surface Water and Storm Water.
The objective of the third tier approach would be to address runoff from existing development as
opportunities arise, so that the quality of stormwater runoff meets the requirements of Chapter
NR 151.
Municipalities should take an active role in promoting urban nonpoint source pollution abatement
through meeting the conditions of their municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) discharge
permits under the Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Stormwater management
planning could be undertaken by municipalities to promote cost-effective urban nonpoint source
pollution abatement.
In addition to the adoption and enforcement of stormwater management ordinances, the most viable
measures to control urban nonpoint sources of pollution appear to be good urban land management
and urban housekeeping practices (see Appendix B). 10 Such practices consist of fertilizer and
pesticide use management, litter and pet waste controls, lawn watering, and management of leaf litter
and yard waste. These measures should be promoted under the public informational programs being
conducted under the conditions of the municipal MS4 discharge permits.
Implement and maintain stormwater management practices at the subwatershed and neighborhood
levels.
Restore floodplain connectivity with the stream system, where feasible.
Improve infiltration through innovative best management practices (BMP) that associated with lowimpact development, including bioretention and rain garden projects (see Appendix C),11 installation
of rain barrels, disconnection of downspouts, and installation of green roofs and porous pavement
projects.
Potential Measures
Numbers of detention and infiltration basins installed, drainage area controlled by regenerative
stormwater practices that achieve quality and quantity control, area of permeable paving materials
installed, acres of wetland and upland restored, area of low-impact development.
Number of rain gardens or rain barrels installed and downspouts disconnected, green roofs installed.
Drainage area controlled by regenerative stormwater practices that achieve quality and quantity
control and numbers of basins inspected and maintained.
_____________
10
UW-Extension, Water Resources Education Publications, http://clean-water.uwex.edu/pubs/index.htm.
11
Roger Bannerman, WDNR and partners; Menasha biofiltration retention research project, Middleton, WI, 2008;
N.J. LeFevre, J.D. Davidson, and G.L. Oberts, Bioretention of Simulated Snowmelt: Cold Climate Performance
and Design Criteria, Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF), 2008; William R. Selbig and Nicholas
Balster, Evaluation of Turf Grass and Prairie Vegetated Rain Gardens in a Clay and Sand Soil: Madison,
Wisconsin, Water Years 2004 2008, In cooperation with the City of Madison and Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources, USGS Scientific Investigations Report, in draft.
62
Miles of stream connected with the floodplain.
Decreases in average flow magnitude, high flow magnitude, high flow event frequency, and/or high
flow duration.
Improvement in flashiness index.
Improvement in instream water quality.12
Water Quality and Quantity

Water Quality and Quantity Target 1
Reduce water quality and quantity impacts from stormwater outfalls, nonpoint runoff, and sewer overflows
including reduction of localized erosion at pipe outfalls.
Issue
There are hundreds of outfalls, primarily storm sewer outfalls, distributed throughout the Menomonee River and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds that have the potential to cause significant degradation to water quality and
streambed and streambank stability.
Objective
Reduce water quality and quantity impacts to improve instream habitat and aquatic communities within the
Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
Recommended Actions
reduce impacts from storm sewer outfalls, nonpoint runoff, and sewer overflows:
Provide adequate stormwater management through traditional (e.g., detention and infiltration basins)
and innovative techniques (e.g., bio-infiltration and green infrastructure).
Identify stream reaches with high salt concentrations and target them for pilot programs.
Evaluate existing road deicing and anti-icing programs with an emphasis on salt reduction;13 establish
new road deicing and anti-icing programs in communities that do not have programs; and promote
optimal application of deicing agents on commercial, industrial, governmental and institutional,
airport, and residential properties.
Implement measures to reduce localized erosion and physically modify the most-active outfalls (i.e.,
those with the greatest effect on instream physical conditions).
_____________
12
Improvements in instream water quality would be expected as a result of implementing many of the
recommendations set forth herein. Because of the complex nature of the stream systems in the Menomonee and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds and because of the existence of pollutants from stormwater runoff and other
sources within the drainage network and streams, a long-term time frame may be needed to identify measurable
improvements in instream water quality. Thus, maintenance of a long-term network of streamflow and water
quality monitoring gauges is recommended (see the Monitoring and Information section below).
13
Calcium chloride application could be reduced through implementing practices such as applying salt only at
intersections, mixing salt with sand, and calibrating spreaders and also through substitution of less
environmentally damaging anti-icing and deicing agents.
63
Potential Measures
Improvement in flashiness index.
Improvement in instream water quality through obtaining water quality and biological data on stream
reaches where salt application has been reduced in tributary areas.
Number of commercial owners, contractors, operators, municipalities, and the public contacted
through information programs on use of salt on driveways and other areas.
Number of flow deflectors installed, pipes cut back from streambank, linear feet of riprap installed, or
land area treated by infiltration practices.
Number of communities implementing new road salt reduction programs.
Reduction in amount of road salt applied by municipalities.
Land-Based Monitoring and Information

It is important that steps be taken to ensure the existence of a sound program of water quality monitoring to
determine the extent to which physical, chemical, and biological conditions are improving over time, to measure
temporal and spatial trends, to provide data to evaluate the effectiveness of water pollution control measures, and
to detect new and emerging water quality problems specifically linked to land use and land management issues in
the watersheds. Therefore, monitoring of land-based activities should be coordinated and linked with the instream
monitoring program (see Instream-Based Monitoring and Information section below) in order to optimize the use
of the scarce monitoring resources of multiple agencies and groups, generate monitoring data that are
scientifically defensible and relevant to the decision-making process, and manage and report water quality data in
ways that are meaningful and understandable to decision makers and other affected parties.
Monitoring and Information Target 1
Continue and expand monitoring and informational programming.
Issue
It is critical to establish improvements or degradation to water quality and biological communities, as well as
physical conditions of the stream and associated corridor lands, in response to land use changes throughout the
watersheds.
Key Questions
Where are land use changes occurring in the area?
What are the current mitigation practices such as rain gardens, downspout disconnection, wet and dry
stormwater basins, infiltration facilities, green roofs, winter road salt reduction, among others?
What mitigation practices are required by ordinance?
Are these mitigation practices effective and maintained?
What are the opportunities for citizen monitoring and participation by schools?
Objective
Continue existing monitoring efforts and expand monitoring and informational programming when possible.
Recommended Actions
continue and expand monitoring and informational programming:
64
Continue and expand coordination of terrestrial monitoring, sampling schedules, and sharing of data
and results among government agencies, nongovernment agencies, citizen monitoring, and research
institutions. Specifically, such monitoring would include periodic bird counts, transect sampling of
upland habitat, and species counts of vegetation, invertebrates (butterflies, beetles, etc.), mammals,
amphibians, and reptiles.
Implement storm drain stenciling and related informational programming to encourage residents to
dispose of waste products safely, avoiding discharge directly to surface waters.
Promote and encourage use of green infrastructure, and monitor implementation and effectiveness of
such practices. Maintain practices as required.
Continue awareness programming and implement monitoring and management of nonnative invasive
species such as buckthorn, gypsy moth, emerald ash borer, and purple loosestrife, among other
species identified or may be identified in Chapter NR 40 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code.
Potential Measures
Number of monitoring stations established, expansion of the biological database, and number of data
analysis and interpretation efforts continued or increased.
Number of stormwater management and green infrastructure practices installed and/or maintained.
Number of citizen monitoring stations established.
Amounts of invasive species removed and/or treated within an area.
Number of informational programs developed or workshops held.
INSTREAM HABITAT PROTECTION MEASURES

Aquatic Organism Passage
Aquatic Organism Passage Target 1
Restore fish and aquatic organism passage from Lake Michigan to the headwaters and tributaries (i.e., follow
three-tiered prioritization strategy as outlined in Figures 23 and 24).
Issue
Fishing, both recreational angling and commercial harvesting of fishes, is an important economic activity in the
greater Milwaukee watersheds and Lake Michigan. The maintenance and continuity of both the species of
economic importance and those species on which they depend is associated to a large degree with the protection
and restoration of appropriate habitat. To this end, efforts to remove obstructions to fish migration along the
mainstems and tributaries of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers are a key element to the long-term
restoration of the fishery. These obstructions include dams, drop structures, roadways, and channelized river
reaches, among others. Removal of these obstructions should be accompanied by the restoration or re-creation of
habitat within the stream and riparian corridor that is essential for resting, rearing, feeding, and spawning of fishes
and other organisms.
Key Questions
What are the characteristics of the physical instream habitat (e.g., aquatic habitat composition, pool
quality, structural complexity) and what factors are influencing this condition?
What is the condition of aquatic communities and what factors (e.g., habitat suitability, habitat
fragmentation, nonnative species) are influencing the distribution or population viability of native and
desired aquatic species?
65
Objective
The objective is to restore the biotic integrity of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River systems by reducing the
fragmentation within these stream systems and reconnecting them with Lake Michigan. This objective is based
upon a three-tiered approach (see Figures 23 and 24), focused on the reconnection of waterways that have been
historically isolated from the Lake Michigan stream system (e.g., through construction of dams, roadways, stream
enclosures, concrete lining, and flow control structures) or modified through single-focus structural means (e.g.,
stormwater conveyances). The strategy is predicated upon a tiered approach: Tier 1restoring connectivity
between the mainstem waterways and the Lake Michigan endpoint, Tier 2restoring connectivity between the
tributary streams and the mainstems of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers, and Tier 3expanding
connection of highest-quality fish, invertebrate, and habitat sites within each of the watersheds, as shown on
Maps 5 and 8. As structures are removed or retrofitted, to promote fish passage over time, there will be improved
access to the highest-quality habitat areas for feeding, rearing, and spawning, leading to restoration of a more
sustainable fishery within both of these watersheds.
Recommended Actions
restore fish and aquatic organism passage from Lake Michigan to the headwaters and tributaries of the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers:
Develop plans for improving fish passage in the 0.6-mile-long reach of the Menomonee River from
IH 94 to the upstream side of the Canadian Pacific Railway bridge in reach MN-18, subject to
preserving the integrity of the Valley Park flood management facilities as shown in Figure 17 in
Chapter II of this report.
Develop plans for improving fish passage in the currently concrete-lined reaches of the Kinnickinnic
River (reaches KK-3 and KK-10) as shown in Figure 20 in Chapter II of this report, subject to
meeting flood management objectives.
Develop plans for removal and/or retrofitting of five low-head structures in the Menomonee River
between Swan Boulevard and Harmonee Avenue and implement those plans (see Figure 25).
Concrete removal identified above is recommended to be undertaken simultaneously with restoring

connectivity with the floodplain and recreating a more natural meandering stream. For example, the
first phase of the Underwood Creek rehabilitation and flood management project was able to
successfully accomplish flood management goals, reconnection with the floodplain, re-creation of
riparian buffers, and instream restoration goals simultaneously with removal of concrete (see
Figure 11 in Chapter II of this report).
Develop plans for removal and/or retrofitting of additional obstructions such as road crossings,
enclosed pipe (daylighting streams subject to satisfaction of floodplain management requirements),
debris jams, among others on the mainstem and tributaries and implement the plans throughout the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. However, it is not recommended that projects to
improve fish passage be implemented at General Mitchell International Airport (GMIA) within the
KK-4 subwatershed. The airport is currently served by an extensive series of floodwater and
stormwater conveyances, including stream channel enclosures.14 These facilities are designed to
minimize flooding on the airport grounds and upstream of the airport. It is not feasible or desirable to
_____________
14
The airport area was historically comprised of a complex wetland system as shown in the 1836 channel
condition, as shown on Map 4.
66
Figure 25
FISH PASSAGE OBSTRUCTIONS WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED BETWEEN
SWAN BOULEVARD AND HARMONEE AVENUE WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER: 2009
River Crossing Fish Passage Obstructions
67
Figure 25 (continued)
68
modify these systems; however, there are continued opportunities for actions to improve water
quality within the KK-4 subwatershed from pollutant runoff from deicing agents or other
constituents.
Develop detailed assessments to expand restoration efforts to promote aquatic organism passage
beyond the mainstem to the tributaries, develop priorities, and implement restoration projects. See
Table 8 for a list of the number of road crossings or obstructions for each subwatershed within the
Menomonee River watershed and their relationship to fish passage, stream length, habitat quality, and
biological quality sample sites.
Potential Measures
Stream-miles of concrete removed.
Number of native species present or some equivalent biological indicator (see Biological
Assessment section above).
Number of structures removed or retrofitted (e.g., bridge crossings or drop structures).
Stream-miles of enclosed channel daylighted or retrofitted, number of tributary miles connected to

mainstem, or miles of stream channel restored.
Information Needs
Refine assessment of fish passage obstructions throughout the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds (see Appendix D).
Aquatic Habitat
Aquatic Habitat Target 1
Restore fish and aquatic organism habitat from Lake Michigan to the headwaters and tributaries (i.e., follow
three-tiered prioritization strategy as outlined in Figures 23 and 24).
Issue
Since the early 1800s both the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River systems have been substantially altered
through channelization, development (agricultural and urban) impacts, road construction, stormwater conveyance
systems, historical fill, and other historical and present day actions that have physically, chemically, and
hydrologically degraded habitat.
Key Questions
What are the basic morphological characteristics of streams in the watershed?
What are the causes of current instabilities in the hydrologic processes within the watershed?
What aquatic resources are they affecting?
How do current riparian conditions contribute to existing channel conditions?
How much area within the watershed has severe erosion and where does it occur?
What are the dominant hydrologic characteristics (e.g., baseflow, peak flows, minimum flows) and
other notable hydrologic features and processes in the watershed (e.g., groundwater recharge areas)?
What is needed in terms of aquatic and riparian resource restoration within the watershed?
69
Figure 26
DOWNSTREAM REACHES WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER AND KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHEDS
MENOMONEE RIVER (WITHIN REACH MN-19)
KINNICKINNIC RIVER (WITHIN REACH KK-11)
Objective
The objective is to preserve and improve, to the extent practical, physical, chemical, and hydrological
characteristics related to habitat conditions throughout both the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
The prioritization strategy is based upon the three-tiered approach as previously described and is focused on
restoring habitat in a number of ways primarily including removal of concrete, remeandering streams to
rehabilitate channelized reaches, and protecting excessively eroding streambanks and streambeds (Figures 23
and 24). These actions would be designed to improve several dimensions of habitat that include but are not
limited to elements such as adequate water depth, pool-riffle structure, stream hydrology, variable substrate
composition, and instream cover such as overhanging vegetation or large woody debris. As habitat among reaches
and the connectedness of the stream system are improved over time, there will be improved access to the highestquality habitat areas for feeding, rearing, and spawning, leading to restoration of a more sustainable fishery within
both of these watersheds.
Recommended Actions
restore fish and aquatic organism habitat from Lake Michigan to the headwaters and tributaries of the Menomonee
and Kinnickinnic River systems:
70
Protect and expand existing highest-quality remaining fishery and aquatic habitat (see Maps 5 and 8
and Table 8).
Enhance fisheries within reach KK-11 (see Figure 26) of the Kinnickinnic River and within reach MN19 (see Figure 26) of the Menomonee River by providing areas for fish spawning, juvenile rearing, and
refuge and feeding. Habitat restoration methods could include provision of spawning reefs that have
been successfully established by WDNR staff within and adjacent to the Milwaukee Harbor estuary as
well as potential use of emerging technologies such as the Cuyahoga Habitat Underwater Baskets
(CHUBs) pioneered by the Cuyahoga River Community Planning Organization with financial support
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (http://www.cuyahogariverrap.org/index.html).
Provide instream habitat treatments including pool and riffle structure, substrates, and vegetation.
Protect excessively eroding streambanks or streambeds, especially where structures such as bridge
abutments and buildings are threatened.
Restore connectivity with the floodplain and recreate a more natural meandering stream. This is also
recommended to be undertaken simultaneously with restoring habitat areas, where possible, in order
to provide for the diverse habitat life history needs of fish and aquatic organisms (rearing, feeding,
spawning, and refuge areas).
Maintain water quality conditions conducive to a successful and sustainable fishery.
Remove trash and other debris from the stream channel and adjacent riparian areas.
Expand operation of the River skimmer boat and other clean-up programs within the Menomonee and
Kinnickinnic River systems.
Potential Measures
Stream-miles of habitat protected.
Stream-miles of habitat created.
Number of miles connected and functional as fish and aquatic organism habitat.
Number of native species present or some equivalent biological indicator (see biological assessment
section above).
Tons of trash and debris removed.
Improvements in water quality, especially as related to thermal regime, oxygen concentrations and/or
fluctuations, turbidity, and chlorides.
Information Needs
Complete periodic streambank and streambed erosion assessments to identify areas for protection.
Aquatic Organisms
Aquatic Organism Target 1
Restore a sustainable fishery.
Issue
Since the early 1800s both the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River systems have been substantially altered
through channelization, development (agricultural and urban) impacts, road construction, stormwater conveyance
systems, historical fill, and other historical and present day actions that have lead to aquatic and semi-aquatic
community degradation to fishes, amphibians, invertebrates, and algae.
Key Questions
What aquatic or semi-aquatic (amphibian) communities or species are in decline or are considered
rare within and adjacent to streams?
How do the current conditions compare with reference or desired conditions, and how do these relate
to human activities in the watershed?
71
How might the current conditions affect future land management objectives and strategies, and what
can be done to bridge the gap between current and desired conditions?
What is the relative abundance and distribution of species of concern that are important in the
watershed (Threatened or Endangered Species, Management Indicator Species, Species of Special
Concern, Birds of Conservation Concern)?
What is the distribution and character of their habitats?
What activities could occur to improve riparian habitat conditions and improve wildlife habitat
conditions?
What needs and opportunities are there for habitat protection, maintenance, or enhancement?
Objective
The objective is to restore a sustainable fishery through the improvement of multiple aquatic and semi-aquatic
communities that include fishes, invertebrates, algae, mussels, and amphibians. Although there is limited
information on amphibians, mussels, or algae, these are important dimensions necessary to achieve the sustainable
fishery target. The prioritization strategy is based upon the three-tiered approach as previously described and is
focused on expanding the most diverse and highest-quality aquatic communities within the Menomonee and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds (see Maps 5 and 8 and Table 8).
Recommended Actions
restore a sustainable fishery in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River systems:
Protect and expand the remaining or existing highest-quality aquatic communities (see Maps 5 and 8
and Table 8).
Develop and implement plans for control and removal of nonnative species.
Reintroduce native species.
Potential Measures
Number, type, and life stages of native species observed (see Biological Assessment section above).
Area cleared or tons removed of nonnative species.
Instream Monitoring and Informational Programming

Target
Continue and expand monitoring and informational programming.
Issue
Knowledge of land use and instream conditions is essential for good planning and implementation of management
measures that will be both acceptable to communities and sustainable from an ecological and economic
perspective. In addition, creation of awareness of the multiple values of the waterways of the greater Milwaukee
watersheds is an important element of any restoration or protection effort. Without such awareness and buy in
from communities, efforts to affect land use decisions and improve instream conditions are limited to very little, if
any, success. Consequently, integration of public awareness building into the framework of interventions planned
in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds will be a key element of the success of the ecosystem
restoration projects proposed herein. Toward these ends, the following section summarizes the recommended
constituents (physical, chemical, and biological) and methods to conduct existing and future monitoring efforts
within both of these watersheds.
72
Key Questions
Where are the existing physical, chemical, and biological monitoring points in the area?
What are the current monitoring protocolssite locations, frequency of sampling, parameters
analyzed?
What are the opportunities for citizen monitoring and participation by schools?
Objective
The objective of the environmental monitoring activities is to document scientifically sound data and related
information on the physical, chemical, and biological conditions of the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River
watersheds to guide management actions in the River systems. Scientifically sound data and related information
provides the basis not only for completing the detailed engineering and technical designs of specific projects, but
also provides a basis for assessing success or failure of those projects. These data form an element of the process
of public knowledge-building associated with increasing public awareness of the issues facing the Kinnickinnic
and Menomonee River watersheds, and provide an avenue for direct civic involvement in the design and
implementation of priority projects. The goal of the monitoring projects would be to fully document the beforeand-after conditions extent in the vicinity of each activity, in both the upstream and downstream flow directions
and cross-river transects. While river depth and flow conditions are important considerations in determining the
types and nature of the monitoring to be conductedcitizen-based or classroom-based monitoring may be
appropriate in some situations where samples and data can be safely accessed without risk to volunteers or
studentsprofessional monitoring may be more appropriate for certain parameters and in situations where
specialized knowledge or equipment may be required. It is envisioned that a combination of citizen monitoring
and monitoring by professional staff (e.g., USGS, WDNR, MMSD, and others) would be required to document
the outcomes of implementing recommended projects.
The objective of the informational programming is to enhance awareness of the values of the River systems and
their tributaries as elements of the natural resource base, as vital arteries of the local neighborhoods, and as
important economic resources for the communities through which the Rivers and the tributaries flow.
Restoration of naturalized systems and the reconnection of linkages between stream reaches that had been
segmented by structures is not without risk. The introduction and spread of exotic invasive species, for example,
continues to be a problem in the greater Milwaukee watersheds and Lake Michigan. However, to some degree,
this risk remains regardless of the connectivity of stream segments and streams to Lake Michigan. Nonnative
species have been, and will continue to be, introduced into inland waters of the State in the absence of direct
linkages between the Great Lakes and the tributary streams. Consequently, the presence of nonnative species
should not be viewed as a reason to maintain the status quo regarding connectivity of streams and lakes. For
example, the removal of impediments to the movement of fish and aquatic life as in the case of the former North
Avenue dam has benefited desirable species including smallmouth bass and lake sturgeon and has not resulted in
the proportion of nonnative species in the Milwaukee River.
Nevertheless, the presence of nonnative species in a habitat can produce alterations in the physical and biological
characteristics of the habitat. Since the early 19th century, at least 145 nonnative species, preferentially introduced
into the Great Lakes through ballast water discharges from ships, have become established in the Great Lakes.
Other nonnative species, such as common carp, Eurasian water milfoil, zebra mussels and purple loosestrife, have
been introduced into the greater Milwaukee watersheds from other sources, and have become established in lakes
and streams throughout the region. Typically, these populations can grow rapidly due to both their high
reproductive capacities and the absence of predators, parasites, pathogens, and competitors in their new habitat.
Once established in a waterbody, these species can rarely be eliminated, but, rather, are capable of being readily
dispersed to other waterbodies. In many cases, this dispersal is aided by direct or indirect human actions;
therefore, incorporation of invasive species monitoring and informational programming is an important element to
be included in a monitoring program for the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
73
Recommended Actions
continue and expand monitoring and informational programming in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds:
As the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River Watershed Restoration Plans are implemented by
the Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. (SWWT), Watershed Actions Teams (WATs),
liaison with the ongoing WDNR, MMSD, and USGS monitoring programs is recommended, and
modification of these programs is suggested so they can provide site-specific information on potential
priority project areas within the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River watersheds. Where appropriate,
these programs should include collection, dissemination, and analysis of data on a range of
parameters, including physical (stream morphological and hydrological data), chemical, and
biological (fisheries and invertebrate population data) parameters. The selection of specific
parameters should be guided not only by existing data collection programs, to ensure consistency and
continuity of data collection, but also by the likely interventions to be considered at specific sites.
Again, these data should be collected both before and after the interventions are designed and
implemented. Such data will provide the basis for evaluating the effectiveness of the specific
interventions and support future implementation of similar, successful actions elsewhere in the
watersheds.
Continue and expand citizen- and student-supported monitoring efforts and maintenance of
inventories for fish passage, habitat, aquatic organisms, and water quality. Such efforts should be
supported and integrated into the data collection and analysis process associated with the professional
programs noted above. These programs form a vehicle for ongoing data collection that frequently
extend beyond the specific project period, and can contribute both to enhanced civic awareness and to
the education of youth.
Identify and develop new monitoring sites in cooperation with citizen and other monitoring programs
and share the knowledge with stakeholders.
Because prevention remains the first line of defense in the protection of the ecological integrity of the
waters of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers, it is recommended that programs to reduce the
spread of nonnative and invasive species as well as programs to inform and educate the public on
these issues be continued and supported.
Incorporate information from MMSD infrastructure reports (detailed information on concrete-lined

channels, storm sewer outfalls, drop structures, road crossings, sanitary sewer overflow and combined
sewer overflow outfalls, among others) in future inventory updates to provide the most up-to-date
structure inventories.
Potential Measures
Number of monitoring stations continued and/or established and conditions documented and shared
with stakeholders.
Amounts of invasive species removed and/or treated within a reach.
Number of informational programs delivered.
Recreation
Recreation Target 1
Improve recreational opportunities.
74
Issue
The Kinnickinnic and Menomonee Rivers and their tributary streams form an important element of the natural
resource base of the metropolitan Milwaukee area. The location of the Rivers within environmental corridors and
open space areas provides an opportunity for people to utilize and enjoy these resources for recreational and
aesthetic viewing purposes. Consequently, these resources can provide an essential avenue for relief of urban
stressors among the population and improve quality of life in local neighborhoods and the entire Milwaukee area,
such as identified in the Vision for the Kinnickinnic River Trail Corridor project.15 Such uses also sustain
industries associated with outfitting and support recreational and other uses of the natural environment, and,
therefore, provide economic opportunities for the local communities.
Key Questions
Where are the major human concentrations in the area?
What are the current recreational opportunities within the watersheds?
What are the limitations to outdoor recreation?
What are some of the other opportunities that could be captured, such as linking trail systems,
creating water trails, and connecting with businesses and attractions?
What negative impacts may be associated with the recreational activities, and what opportunities are
there to reduce those impacts?
Objectives
As embodied in the regional park and open space plan and county and local open space plans, the objective of this
element is to ensure continuity of access to the water resources of the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds, and to restore access opportunities in the Kinnickinnic River watershed as may be appropriate.
Making these urban waterways an attractive and welcoming part of the open space system will enhance public
awareness and commitment to these resources.
Recommended Actions
improve recreational opportunities in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds:
With respect to the regulation and management of fishing, boating and related land-based recreational
opportunities offered in the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River watersheds, it is recommended that
current levels of enforcement be maintained and that ordinances be reviewed to determine whether
canoe and kayak access is unnecessarily restricted under certain conditions.
Promote and implement the ideas and recommendations identified within the Kinnickinnic River
Corridor Neighborhood Plan such as expanding views and safe use/access to the river corridor,
improving water quality and habitat for fishes and wildlife, establish riverfront activities that engage
_____________
15
Sixteenth Street Community Health Center, A Vision for the Kinnickinnic River Trail Corridor, prepared in
partnership with City of Milwaukee, WDNR, National Park Service, Groundwork Milwaukee, and the University
of Wisconsin-Milwaukees Community Design Solutions program, November 2007.
75
users and create a lively environment such as community gardens, enhance local neighborhood
business districts, among others.16
In addition, recreational boating access users should be made aware of the presence of the exotic
invasive species Eurasian water milfoil, zebra mussel, and rusty crayfish among others. Appropriate
signage should be placed at the public and private recreational boating sites, and supplemental
materials on the control of invasive species should be made available to the public. These materials
could be provided to riparian householders by means of mail drops or distribution of informational
materials at public buildings, such as municipal buildings and public libraries, and to nonriparian
users by means of informational materials provided at the entrance to all municipal public
recreational boating access sites.
Make disposal bins available at the public recreational boating access sites for disposal of plant
materials and other refuse removed from watercraft using the public recreational boating access sites.
Additionally, the rivers, their associated parkways, and proximity to other economic and cultural
resources of the metropolitan Milwaukee area provide further opportunities for linking watersheds
through both land-based and water-based trails (see Maps 15 and 16). Connecting these landscape
features through an integrated system of roads, trails, paths, and waterways will further bolster the
need for services, including services such as hostelries, restaurants, and entertainment, as well as
outlets for supplies and maintenance. All of these services, in turn, provide outlets for informational
programming materials that will build awareness of the value of the natural environment to the
region, and create a base for citizen and stakeholder action to underpin the needed investments in
ecosystem management. Therefore, it is recommended that opportunities to form a continuous
riverfront trail system be pursued.17
Build landowner relationships and seek conservation easements, land donation, or land purchase
within the recommend priority lands indentified on Maps 13 and 14 within the Menomonee River and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds, respectively.
Where feasible, and subject to land access considerations related to the efficient movement of
vehicles and trains and the provision of emergency services, consider removal of bridges or other
navigational hazards to reduce the risk of injury and/or fatalities due to recreation.
Consider removal of low-clearance bridges or dangerous abutments and other navigational hazards to
improve recreational opportunities and safety within the Rivers.
Consider signage to advise boaters of obstructions and/or other safety hazards.
Design and install trail connections and interpretive signs to identify habitat types, trials, canoeing,
and fishing access areas.
_____________
16
The Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District with Sixteenth Street Community Health Center, Kinnickinnic
River Corridor Neighborhood Plan, prepared by JJR, PDI/Graef, Beth Foy and Associates, and Gladys Gonzalez
of Palante! Creative, LLC., final draft October 2009.
17
SEWRPC Memorandum Report No. 152, A Greenway Connection Plan for the Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District, December 2002; and Kristen Wilhelm and Jason Schroeder, River Revitalization Foundations
Menomonee River Mainstem Land Protection Plan 2008-2009, 2009.
76
Potential Measures
Number of facilities maintained or added for public access to streams
Miles of trials established or managed
Numbers of signs installed to identify unsafe navigational hazards, number of navigational hazards
removed or retrofitted, number of new public access sites or facilities created, number of
informational signs installed
Number of safe recreation days, number of areas identified as safe for recreation, number of safe exits
constructed in confined channels
Number of trash and debris accumulation locations identified, improvement of trash and debris
accumulation points in the watershed, and tons of trash and debris collected and disposed of
SAMPLING PARAMETERS AND METHODOLOGIES

The land use, surface water quality, and auxiliary elements of the recommended plan set forth in PR No. 50
contain proposed actions which, when combined with the refined targets and actions described in this report,
should enhance and/or help preserve the surface water quality and biological quality of the streams in both the
Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. It is also important that steps be taken to ensure the existence of
a sound program of water quality monitoring to determine the extent to which physical, chemical, and biological
conditions are improving over time, to measure temporal and spatial trends, to provide data to evaluate the
effectiveness of water pollution control measures, and to detect new and emerging water quality problems. It is
important that such a monitoring program integrate and coordinate the use of scarce monitoring resources of
multiple agencies and groups, generate monitoring data that are scientifically defensible and relevant to the
decision-making process, and manage and report water quality data in ways that are meaningful and
understandable to decision makers and other affected parties. As summarized in the Existing Water Quality
Monitoring Information section in Chapter II of this report, water quality monitoring is well-established within
both the Menomonee River and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. Therefore, the following section summarizes the
recommendations related to habitat and biological monitoring parameters and methods to conduct existing and
future monitoring efforts within both of these watersheds.
Habitat Assessment
It is essential to the proper evaluation of potential habitat improvements or impacts that physical, chemical, and
biological monitoring data be collected. The habitat methodologies should include consideration of both key
chemical and physical parameters and biological response parameters within the streams of the Menomonee and
Kinnickinnic River watersheds. Assessments should be consistent with protocols for characterizing habitat
conditions used by both the WDNR and USGS.18 In addition to these quantitative habitat methods, there are
qualitative fish habitat rating methods developed by the WDNR for small (less than 10 meters, or about 30 feet, in
width) and large (greater than 10 meters in width) wadable streams (see data sheets in Appendix E). Although
these qualitative methods do not provide as much information as the quantitative methods, they do provide very
useful supplemental information, are much less time consuming to complete, and may provide an easy
methodology for volunteer monitoring.
_____________
18
U.S. Geological Survey, Protocol for Characterizing Habitat, Water Resources Investigations Report 984052; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Guidelines for Evaluating Habitat in Wadable Streams,
June 2000; L. Wang and others, Development and Evaluation of a Habitat Rating System for Low-Gradient
Wisconsin Streams, North American Journal of Fisheries Management, Volume 18:775785, 1998; and T.D.
Simonson and others, Guidelines for evaluating fish habitat in Wisconsin Streams, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, General Technical Report NC-164, 1994.
77
In addition to the more traditional methodologies summarized above, there are newly emerging monitoring
procedures such as the Center for Watershed Protections Unified Stream Assessment methodology for urban
river systems.19 These methodologies go beyond the traditional methods and incorporate important elements such
as stormwater outfalls, severe erosion, impacted buffers, utilities, trash and debris, and stream crossings. These
methodologies, or some equivalent, should be a part of the long-term monitoring strategies for the Menomonee
and Kinnickinnic River watersheds. Fish passage assessment at roadway crossings is becoming recognized as one
of the most fundamental potential limiting factors in urban watersheds, which is why it is vital to include
assessment protocols that address passage at road crossings into monitoring programs for these watersheds (see
proposed draft fish passage assessment protocols developed by The Nature Conservancy in Appendix D). The
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Causal Analysis/Diagnosis Decision Information System
(CADDIS) is a tool for identifying stressors causing biological impairments in aquatic ecosystems. CADDIS is an
online application that helps scientists and engineers find, access, organize, use and share information to conduct
causal evaluations in aquatic systems. It is based on the USEPA Stressor Identification process, which is a formal
method for identifying causes of impairments in aquatic systems.
The amount of impervious surface and tributary area land uses are extremely important to consider in a long-term
monitoring program. These estimates form the basis for pollutant modeling, tracking trends in land use changes,
and identifying opportunities. SEWRPC staff is scheduled to initiate a revised land use update for the entire seven
county Southeastern Wisconsin Region in 2010. When completed, the updated existing land use information
should be incorporated into the monitoring program assessment for both the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds. For example, this could involve comparison of existing and historical land use over time and the
effect on habitat of changes over time and prioritization of open lands for acquisition, and it could relate to the
selection of sites to monitor.
Biological Assessment
Biological assessments using existing WDNR protocols or some equivalent are recommended to be conducted for
fishes and invertebrates to characterize the aquatic community. 20 Where possible these biological assessments
should be conducted at the same monitoring stations where habitat data are collected. Consistent with the
recommendations of PR No. 50, the initial habitat and biological monitoring stations should be established at
existing long-term USGS streamflow and water quality gages. Fisheries surveys should target collection of the
entire fish assemblage. Diatoms (microscopic algae) also are good indicators for habitat evaluations, but limited
data exists within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River systems.
There are a large number of potential parameters and/or indices that could be used to measure biological
community quality, however, some of the key recommended constituents are listed below.
_____________
19
Center for Watershed Protection, Urban Subwatershed Restoration Manual No. 11, Unified Subwatershed and
Site Reconnaissance: A Users Manual Version 1.0, March 2004.
20
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Guidelines for Assessing Fish Communities of Wadable Streams
in Wisconsin, June 2000; W.L. Hilsenhoff, An improved index of organic stream pollution, Great Lakes
Entomology, Volume 20, pages 31-39, 1987; and W.L. Hilsenhoff, A modification of the biotic index of organic
stream pollution to remedy problems and to permit its use throughout the year, The Great Lakes Entomologist,
Volume 31, pages 1-12, 1998.
78
Fisheries
Species richness
Total abundance
Shannons diversity index21
Warmwater Index of Biological Integrity (IBI)22
Number and proportion of native species
Number and proportion of nonnative species
Number and proportion of species intolerant to pollution
Number and proportion of species tolerant to pollution
Number of species and individuals, native species, predator fish; and number of fish in certain groups, such as
sunfishes, suckers, darters, and other groups
Intermittent Index of Biological Integrity (IBI)23
Cool and warmwater transitional fish species24
Invertebrates
Counts by genera
Counts by family
Ephemeroptera-Plecoptera-Trichoptera (EPT) Index
Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI)
Invertebrate Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI)25
Number and proportion of EPT genera
Shannons diversity index
Algae
Algal metrics including tolerance indices and relative-abundance26
In addition to the selected indices listed above, there are numerous other physical, chemical, water quality,
toxicity, and biological parameters that have been identified to be important indicators within urbanizing
watersheds in Wisconsin based upon recent USGS research under the National Water Quality Assessment
_____________
21
J.E. Brower, Jerrold H. Zar, and Carl N. von Ende, Field and Laboratory Methods for General Ecology, Third
Edition, Wm. C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa, 1989; Robert E. Ricklefs, Ecology, Second Edition,
University of Pennsylvania, Chiron Press, New York, New York, 1979.
22
J. Lyons, Using the Index of Biotic Integrity to measure environmental quality in warmwater streams of
Wisconsin, U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report NC-149, 1992.
23
J. Lyons, A fish based Index of biotic integrity to assess intermittent headwater streams in Wisconsin, USA,
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Volume 122: 239-258, 2006.
24
J. Lyons, Defining and characterizing coolwater streams and their fish assemblages in Michigan and
Wisconsin, USA, North American Journal of Fisheries Management, Volume 29: 1130-1151, 2009.
25
Brian Weigel, Development of stream invertebrate models that predict watershed and local stressors in
Wisconsin, Journal of the North American Benthological Society, Volume 22(1):123142, 2003.
26
Herman Van Dam, Adrienne Mertens, and Jos Sinkeldam, A coded checklist and ecological indicator values of
freshwater diatoms from The Netherlands, Journal of Aquatic Ecology, Volume 28(1), pages 117-133, 1994.
79
Program.27 These parameters also should be considered as part of the ongoing and future monitoring programs
within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds.
Hydrological Assessment
Several important hydrological constituents summarized below have been identified by USGS staff, 28 based upon
recent research related to the effects of urbanization on stream ecosystems among 30 sites in nine metropolitan
areas around the country, including one location in the Milwaukee metropolitan area. In general, the Flashiness
Index, which reflects the frequency and rapidity of short terms changes in streamflow in response to rainfall
events,29 correlates well to the Fish IBI metric. For example, a Flashiness Index above a certain threshold may
cause the IBI (fish) and Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) (invertebrate) metrics to decrease
(degrading stream condition). In addition, average flow magnitude, high flow magnitude, high flow event
frequency, high flow duration, and rate of change of stream cross-sectional area are the hydrological variables
most consistently associated with changes in algal, invertebrate, and fish communities. Wet weather sampling
protocols have also been identified as important to incorporate into a monitoring program for these watersheds
(see SEWRPC PR No. 50 and Appendix F).30 Finally, hydraulic shear stress in a stream reach is an important
factor to evaluate. If the reach is in an area that is prone to more scouring effects, suspended solids increase and
more filter feeding invertebrates would usually be found in this location. If the reach is in an area that has less
scraping effects, the suspended solids are reduced and more gathering type invertebrates would be expected in the
reach.31
Additional Monitoring and Evaluation Parameters to Consider
There are many important water quality constituents, including metals and nutrients, that are currently monitored
and/or recommended to be monitored in the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River watersheds (see SEWRPC TR
No. 39 and PR No. 50). However, there are a number of potential nontraditional measures besides improvements
in dissolved oxygen, total phosphorus, or temperature that are equally important and should be incorporated into a
monitoring and evaluation program. These measures are a mixture of direct physical improvements to the channel
and land- and water-based recreation. Since it may be very difficult to actually demonstrate a direct improvement
in water quality from an activity such as the purchase of lands to enhance a riparian buffer at one site, it remains
important to identify some type of measure of achieving the goal of improved water quality. In this case, the
amount of land purchased could be a good indicator of implementation for the protection and improvement of
water quality. To this end, several measures are recommended to be considered in evaluating progress toward
watershedwide habitat improvement. A monitoring and evaluation program should consider: improvements in wet
weather and dry weather water quality; increase in number of safe recreational days; volume of contaminated
_____________
27
Kevin D. Richards, Barbara C. Scudder, Faith A. Fitzpatrick, Jeffery J. Steuer, Amanda H. Bell, Marie C.
Peppler, Jana S. Stewart, and Mitchell A. Harris, Effects of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystems Along an
Agriculture-to-Urban Land-use Gradient, Milwaukee to Green Bay, Wisconsin, 2003-2004, Scientific
Investigations Report 2006-5101-C, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, 2008.
28
Personal Communication with U.S. Geological Survey staff, including Barb Scudder, Dave Graczyk , Jeff
Steuer, Peter Hughes, and Morgan Schneider.
29
D.B. Bake, and others, A new flashiness index: characteristics and applications to Midwestern rivers and
streams, Journal of the American Water Resources Association, Volume 40(2): Pages 503-522, April 2004.
30
Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) Publication: Protocols for Studying Wet Weather Impacts
and Urbanization Patterns by L. A. Roesner, and others (WERF Stock # 03WSM3)
31
Personal Communication with U.S. Geological Survey staff including Barb Scudder, Dave Graczyk , Jeff Steuer,
Peter Hughes, and Morgan Schneider.
80
sediment removed; ordinances developed or setbacks established to promote riparian buffers; length of concrete
channel lining removed and stream restored; length of channel enclosure removed; length of streambank
stabilized; amount of riparian buffer expanded, purchased, donated, protected, or established; length of trash-free
stream reaches; area of historical fill removed; stream length with safe fishing and canoeing conditions; number
of fish passage obstructions removed or retrofitted; length of channel connected to Lake Michigan, mainstem, or
high-quality area; and improvement of habitat quality ratings.
ANCILLARY RECOMMENDATIONS
In addition to the numerous recommended actions and potential projects identified in the sections above, there are
an unlimited number of additional potential actions that SWWT WAT members could undertake, but that do not
necessarily fit within the confines of the targets identified. To that end, the following list of ideas or examples are
intended to help share ideas from past projects or experiences that have been successful in protecting the
environment.
Provide input to municipal plan commissions on land use decisions affecting the Rivers.
Maintain a geographic information system database of existing projects to monitor and improve water
quality. For example, riparian buffer width changes through purchase or easements or other types of
agreements.
Maintain contact with State, county and local elected officials and inform them of concerns regarding
protection of the Rivers and associated tributaries. Consider introduction of a program such as the
Rock River Coalition Send your Legislator Down the River awareness program.
Encourage inclusion of river-oriented curricula in local schools. Promote river monitoring and storm
drain stenciling in cooperation with community organizations such as the Urban Ecology Center.
Share inventory information with MMSD, WDNR, and SEWRPC to incorporate into planning
documents.
Consider establishment of demonstration projects on WAT members properties. Encourage

implementation of demonstration projects or sustainable landscaping in public parks.
Create and erect signage identifying watershed boundaries or stream crossings on local roadways with
appropriate permission.
Develop and distribute newsletters at municipal buildings and public libraries. Also consider
distributing recycled paper placemats containing river access points and activities of interest, to local
restaurants.
Create a recreational opportunity map showing locations such as access points, parks, viewing areas
for bird watching and watching salmon runs (seek sponsorship of publication cost from businesses or
agencies).
Sponsor a poster, photograph, essay, or video contest to promote awareness and protections of the
Rivers and their watersheds. Solicit prizes and support from community businesses and/or service
organizations.
Identify activities appropriate to community youth and service organizations and share these with the
leadership of these groups (e.g., Eagle Scout projects, community garden projects)
81
Promote synergies with existing community activities and organizations such as recycling, public
health, project clean sweep, among others. Develop partnerships with the Wisconsin Department of
Tourism and local tourism outlets and offices to promote river-oriented outdoor recreation. Partner
with local businesses (e.g., bike shops, canoe liveries, ice cream parlors).
Develop a River Day annual event to promote awareness of the ongoing efforts to protect and
enhance fisheries and recreation. Encourage public access television stations to develop, obtain, and
screen programs related to the natural history of the specific rivers.
Compile an oral and/or photographic history of the rivers in partnership with County historical
societies. Sponsor a river oriented display in community centers and libraries focused on local
neighborhoods.
Develop a revolving grant program to support various activities to protect and enhance water quality
throughout the watersheds similar to the program created by the Root-Pike Water Initiative Network
(WIN).
SUMMARY AND SYNTHESIS

This report represents a refinement of the habitat-related data and recommendations of the SEWRPC regional
water quality management plan update for the greater Milwaukee watersheds (PR No. 50), specifically including
fishery, invertebrate, and habitat data gathered from completion of that plan up to the year 2009. Therefore, the
recommendations summarized in this memorandum assume that progressing toward achievement of designated
and recommended water use objectives and criteria as recommended in PR No. 50 is a high priority action. The
preservation and maintenance of well-functioning habitat within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic River
watersheds are closely associated with the continued improvement of water quality.
Maintenance and improvement of habitat for fish and aquatic organisms in the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee
River watersheds is important to the quality of life of the residents of the greater Milwaukee area. The provision
of fish and aquatic life passage is closely linked with the restoration and re-creation of instream and riparian
habitat. This habitat provides not only refuges for fishes and aquatic life, but also forms feeding and breeding
areas necessary for the survival of these organisms. Shoreland habitat, in the form of vegetated buffers,
contributes to the natural ambience of the river systems and their tributaries, and provides important ecosystem
functions related to flood mitigation, groundwater recharge, water quality enhancement, and terrestrial wildlife.
Reconnection of the rivers and streams to their floodplains provides ecological benefits and helps to protect and
promote human activities in the watersheds, limiting flood damage and promoting good public health, while at the
same time enhancing the visual landscape and providing the human inhabitants with recreational opportunities,
including angling, boating, and scenic viewing opportunities. Protection of the lands indicated on Maps 13 and 14
through appropriate zoning provisions, purchase, and/or acquisition of easements as opportunities arise is an
important aspect of the land-based and instream-based prioritization strategies developed to protect the
Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River watersheds. These prioritization strategies are based upon the main premise
of protecting the existing quality areaseither within water or on landand expanding those areas through
reconnection of streams and land to reduce fragmentation. Ultimately, these actions will not only ensure progress
toward achievement of the fishable and swimmable goals of the Federal Clean Water Act, but also enhance the
quality of life of the resident populations of these watersheds and their visitors.
Continued monitoring of aquatic (physical, chemical, biological) and terrestrial conditions is an essential
component of both the land-based and instream-based priority actions in order to document achievement of
objectives set forth in PR No. 50 and to refine the objectives as necessary as remedial measures are implemented.
82
Priority Actions to Improve Habitat

Within the context described above, the following groups of management measures represent critical priorities for
action to protect and enhance land-based and instream-based habitat within the Menomonee and Kinnickinnic
River watersheds.
Land-based habitat recommendations:
1.
Protect and expand riparian buffers with a priority on reducing fragmentation through linking public,
private, and other protected lands.
2.
Control stormwater quantity to reduce flashiness and improvement of stormwater runoff quality to
moderate contaminant loads including nutrients, metals, salts (chloride), among others.
3.
Manage terrestrial diversity through control of exotic invasive species and introduction of native
plantings.
Instream-based habitat recommendations:

1.
Restore fish and aquatic organism passage to enhance connectivity with Lake Michigan.
2.
Protect and enhance instream habitat through stabilization of areas with excessive bank and bed
erosion; removal of concrete and restoration of stream hydrology dynamics, subject to satisfying
floodland management objectives; and reconnection with floodplain.
3.
Management of aquatic diversity through supplemental stocking, control of exotic invasive species,
and continued habitat improvement (e.g., floodplain or reef spawning areas, juvenile rearing areas,
native and/or critical species reintroduction).
In addition, based upon the analysis and the critical priority actions set forth above, specific management actions
within each of the watersheds are described below.
Kinnickinnic River Watershed
Fisheries enhancement projects within KK-11 should consider habitat re-creation to provide for fish
spawning, juvenile rearing, and refuge and feeding areas. Habitat restoration methods could include
provision of spawning reefs that have been successfully established by WDNR staff within and
adjacent to the Milwaukee Harbor estuary as well as potential use of emerging technologies, such
as the Cuyahoga Habitat Underwater Baskets (CHUBs) pioneered by the Cuyahoga River
Community Planning Organization with financial support from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(http://www.cuyahogariverrap.org/index.html).
Removal of concrete within the downstream reaches of the mainstem (beginning in KK-10 and
continuing through KK-3 from downstream to upstream) should precede any other habitat
improvement projects within this watershed. This concrete removal should utilize the experience and
lessons learned from the MMSD Underwood Creek project which integrated floodplain mitigation
and fisheries habitat improvements (see photo).
Rehabilitation of instream and riparian habitat within the eroding portions of the mainstem within
KK-3. Actions required could include land acquisition for buffer expansion, bed and streambank
protection measures, and fisheries habitat improvements.
Menomonee River Watershed
Removal of approximately 3,800 linear feet of concrete (within reach MN-18) in the vicinity of W.
Wisconsin Avenue and IH 94 to reestablish fish passage to upstream reaches from Lake Michigan
while continuing to provide protection of development from floods. This rehabilitation should include
83
provisions for low-flow fish passage through a series of pools and riffles. In addition, the side slopes
and retaining walls should be removed and regraded, where possible. This project should utilize the
experience and lessons learned from the Underwood Creek rehabilitation project, which integrated
floodplain mitigation and fisheries habitat improvements.
Removal and/or retrofitting of five low-head structures along the Menomonee River between Swan
Boulevard and Harmonee Avenue (within Reach MN-17A). These structures consist of three sewer
crossings, one abandoned road, and one grade control structure. Rehabilitation of riparian and
instream habitat should also be undertaken as part of this removal. It is recommended that concrete
associated with these structures be removed from the stream channel or floodplain where possible.
Kinnickinnic and Menomonee River Watersheds
Continued expansion of recreational trails and creation of linkages between these recreational trails
and regional recreational trails.
84
Continued expansion of trash and debris cleanup efforts and programs within waterways and
associated riparian lands.
Development of demonstration projects to promote newly emerging technologies such as green roofs,
bio-retention, and porous pavement to promote both water quality improvement and peak flow
improvements (reduction in flashiness) throughout the watershed.
MAPS
WA
1
45
Map 1
43
MAINSTEM REACHES, TRIBUTARY

REACHES,
CEDARBURG
AND ASSESSMENT POINTS WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED:
on
Graft2009
Jackson
R
57
Cedarburg
R
32
Germantown
R
181
MN-1
MEQUON
MN-2
MN-1 !
(
MN-3
145
(
!
THIENSVILLE
MN-10
( MN-2
!
MN-3
GERMANTOWN
MN-4
CO.
INGTON
CO.
KESHA
57
167
167
175
R
( MN-10
!
( MN-4
!
MN-5
MN-5
(
!
MN-6
OZAUKEE CO.
MILWAUKEE CO.
100
(
!
MN-6
R
74
BAYSIDE
MN-11
R
32
BROWN
DEER
LANNON
MN-9
(
!
RIVER
HILLS
R
57
FOX
POINT
MN-7
R
181
1
45
MN-7
USSEX
MENOMONEE
GLENDALE
FALLS
WHITE
BA
MN-8
MN-12
MN-11
( !
!
(
(
!
MN-9
BUTLER
(
!
MN-12
isbon
1
41
MN-8
R
74
R
190
EE
SHOR
190
MN-17
MILWAUKEE
43
57
BROOKFIELD
MN-13
164
145
MN-14
(
!
EWAUKEE
ELM
MN-13
!
(
MN-15
43
WAUWATOSA
(
!
MN-14
MN-13A
( MN-17
!
(
!
RMN-16
181
GROVE
Brookfield
MN-17A
18
18
41
MN-18
(
!
94
Mainstem and R
59
Associated Subwatersheds
A
Tributaries and
(
!
Assessment Points
NEW BERLIN
2 Miles
WEST
MILWAUKEE
MN-14A
CO.
94
MILWAUKEE
18
WAUKESHA CO.
MN-19
794
R
59
WEST
ALLIS
R
32
100
MN-16
45
43
94
R
24
894
43
R
36
24
R
119
HALES
CORNERS
38
894
43
GREENFIELD
164
Source: SEWRPC.
MN-18
GREENDALE
R
36
R
181
18
1
Map412
MAINSTEM REACHES, TRIBUTARY REACHES, AND ASSESSMENT POINTS WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
18
94
794
MILWAUKEE
R
59
WEST
MILWAUKEE
WEST
ALLIS
LAKE
KK-11
KK-2
MICHIGAN
( KK-2
!
R
32
(
!
(
KK-1 !
KK-3
45
KK-3
(
!
(
!
KK-9
(
!
KK-10
KK-8
KK-8
KK-1
R
24
894
ST. FRANCIS
( KK-6
!
KK-7
KK-4
43
Mainstem and
Tributaries and
Associated
Subwatersheds
24
-KK-6
R
36
Assessment Points
ORNERS
0.5
Source: SEWRPC.
(
KK-5 !
(!
894
GREENFIELD
(
!
KK-5
119
R
36
GREENDALE
R
794
R
38
GENERAL
MITCHELL
INTERNATIONAL
AIRPORT
R
1 Miles
ST.
94
KK-7 !
(
43
KK-4
CUDAHY
WA
1
45
Map 3
43
HISTORICAL VERSUS CURRENT STREAM

CHANNEL
CEDARBURG
ALIGNMENTS WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 1836 AND 2005
Grafton
Jackson
R
57
Cedarburg
R
32
Germantown
R
181
MN-1
MEQUON
MN-2
MN-3
145
THIENSVILLE
MN-10
57
167
167
GERMANTOWN
MN-5
175
MN-4
MN-6
OZAUKEE CO.
MILWAUKEE CO.
CO.
INGTON
CO.
KESHA
BAYSIDE
MN-11
100
R
32
R
74
BROWN
DEER
LANNON
RIVER
HILLS
R
57
MN-9
FOX
POINT
R
181
1
45
MN-7
USSEX
MENOMONEE
GLENDALE
FALLS
WHITE
BA
MN-12
BUTLER
isbon
1
41
MN-8
R
74
R
190
EE
SHOR
190
MN-17
MILWAUKEE
43
57
BROOKFIELD
MN-13
164
145
MN-17A
EWAUKEE
ELM
MN-13A
43
181
GROVE
Brookfield
WAUWATOSA
MN-14
18
MN-18
18
1
41
18
94
WEST
MILWAUKEE
MN-14A
R
1836 Wetlands
MN-19
94
794
R
59
2005 River System

NEW BERLIN
2 Miles
CO.
1836 River System
MILWAUKEE
WAUKESHA CO.
59
WEST
ALLIS
32
MN-16
45
43
94
R
24
894
43
43
38
36
24
R
119
HALES
CORNERS
894
GREENFIELD
164
Source: Wisconsin Board of Commissioners

of Public Lands and SEWRPC.
100
GREENDALE
R
36
R
181
18
1
Map 4
41
HISTORICAL VERSUS CURRENT STREAM CHANNEL ALIGNMENTS WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 1836 AND 2005
18
94
794
MILWAUKEE
R
59
WEST
MILWAUKEE
WEST
ALLIS
LAKE
KK-11
KK-2
MICHIGAN
R
32
KK-3
45
KK-10
43
ST
94
KK-8
KK-1
ORNERS
ST. FRANCIS
24
894
KK-7
R
38
1836 Wetlands
894
-KK-6
GREENFIELD
1836 River System
R
36
R
24
2005 River System
GENERAL
MITCHELL
INTERNATIONAL
AIRPORT
KK-5
R
119
0.5
1 Miles
Source: Wisconsin Board of Commissioners

of Public Lands and SEWRPC.
R
794
43
R
36
GREENDALE
KK-4
CUDAHY
S 80th St S 80th St S 80th St

S 77th St S 78th St S 78th St S 77th St
S 76th St
S 76th St
S 75th St
S 76th St S 76th St
S 75th St
rk
Pa d
R
S 1st St
S Logan Ave
S Lenox St
S Quincy
Ave
riffin
SG e
Av
E Howard
Ave
E Norwich
Ave
S 1st St
S Pine
Ave
S Burrell St
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
Habitat
E Edgerton
Ave
ll
na
hit
S W Ave
all
hitn
S W Ave S Barland
Ave
S Elaine Ave
E Grange Ave
S Illinois Ave
E Dale
Ave
Dr
11th Ave
e
ksid
re e
SC
S Barland
Ave
Carroll Ct t
kS
Tamaricac
H kory St
S Lipton
Ave
E Birchwood
Ave
E Grange Ave
k
La
"
)
"
)
"
)
ic
inn
i ck
nn
Ki Ave
E Norse
Ave
Dr
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
S Packard
Ave
Fish
S Illinois
Ave
X
W
W
X
S Troy
Ave
Sh
or
e
S Illinois
Ave
Be
n
S India Ave net
t
na
Ave
E Rusk
Good
Ave
E Oklahoma
Hi St
Ave
gh ate
Ave
Excellent
wa
est
r
c
l
l
i
y
H
Ohio
E
E
o
Invertebrates 32
hi
Ave
EO e
E Holt
Av
E VollmerAve Fairly Poor
E Carol St
E Morgan
Ave E Morgan
E St
Ave
Ave
E Warnimont Francis
Fair
Ave
Ave
eth
zab
i
l
nig
E
nd
E Savela
E Ave E Koe
e
Ave
v
g
i
A
n
E Tripoli
oe Good
E Howard E Howard
E K ve
Ave
A
Ave
Ave lengthicof
NOTE: SeeETable
1A for
h total
Norwic
E Norwich
Norw h
E
streambank and streambed
assessed
AveThose segments
Ave are
Ave
ford
for stability.
also
E Water
shown on Maps 20
and 21 in
n
Dento
E
Ave
ESEWRPC
DentonTR No. 39.
Ave
EL
Ave USGS, WDNR,
LeroyMMSD,
ESource:
e ro
Inter-Fluve,
Inc.,
and
SEWRPC.
yA
Ave E Whittaker
ve
Ave
E Van
E Van
Norman
Norman
r
Ave E Armou
Ave
Ave
E Cudahy
E Price Ave
Cudahy Ave
SW
E Layton
hitn Ave
E Layton
all A S
Ave E Squire
ve W
Ave
Ave
h
Av itna
e ll
E Somers
Ave
S Arctic
Ave
St
E Jones
field
Green
E
Ave
E College Ave
St
S Iowa
Ave
W Edgerton
Ave
E Joseph
M
Hutsteine
r Dr
S Arctic
St
Ave
len
El
S Iowa
S
Ave
S Kansas
Ave
State
Highway 38
S 1st St
3rd
St
1 Miles
S Clement Ave
S Logan
Ave
S 2nd St
I-43
ger
bar
th
or Line er
T
tw S
en e
W Av t
S
S S St
t
r
4
S S St ClaiSt
I-79
ay
lair
r Dr
C
tSB
arbo t
S Logan
4
ay S
SH
I-79
Ave
yS SB
r Dr
ry Dr E Ba cess Rd
arbo
S HS Carfer
Ac
S Aldrich St
St
W Boden St
W Uncas
Ave
W
College
St
0
0.5
W College Ave Ave
S Adams
Ave
E Holt Ave
Iro
S Kansas
Ave
S Iowa
Ave
I-794
St
E Otjen St
e
l
Ave
da
ter
ose
Pot
R
E
W Ave
Pa
rk
R
d
r
i
C
r
Park Rd
e
u
a
E G E Gauer
Cir
a
om
h
la
Ok v e
W
A
te
Sta y 38
a
hw
Hig
W Edgerton
Ave
W Abbott
Ave
th
S4
W
WX
XX
W
KK-10
o
ins
ob
S R Ave
#
*
!
(
"
)
E Smith St
S Ace
Industrial Dr
S Ace
5th
Industrial Dr
794
5th 794
S Delaware
5th 5th 794 In
5th 794
ternation
Ave
al Dr
794
S Indiana Ave
SN
i
c
Ave
a
h
a
Indian
S
S Indian
o
Ave lson
Ave S Illinois
S Merill Ave Ave
S Robert Ave
S Elaine
14th Ave
S Barland
Ave
14th
Ave S Mc
Ave
Creedy
S Kingan
Ave
1th
S Packard
Ave
Ave
S Packard Ave
Ave
W Pierce St
W Bruce St
W National
Ave
W Walker St
Acc
ess
W Mineral St
Rd
ri e
EE
W Becher St
S 1st St S 1st St
KK-11
S 2nd St S 2nd St
an
ad
a
S 9th St
S 18th St
Gr
S 6th St
S 5th St
t
nd S
S 7th St
KK-5
S 6th St
S 7th St
S 22
W Kimberly
Ave
W Mangold Ave
W Alvina
W Alvina Ave
Ave
W College Ave W College Ave
ey
on r
H kD
S ree
C
State H
ge
ighway
119
an
Gr e
W Av
ir
A
W Grange Ave W
W Grange Ave
KK-4
Way
argo
te
C
a
9
t
W Klein
S y 11
a
Ave
hw
Hig
ion
itat
W Goldcrest
E C ay
W
Ave
W Iona Ter
W Upham
Ave
S 6th St
t
S 16th S
S 21st St
W Holmes
W Halsey Ave
Ave
W
W Edgerton
Edgerton
W Edgerton
Ave
Ave
Ave
S 26th St
y
S Hone
Dr
Creek
da
W Wanda
an
Ave W W ve
A
hwood
W Birc
Ave
W Goldcrest
Ave W Ramsey
W Ramsey
Ave
Ave
I-43
Ct
S 5th
#
*
W Hayes
Ave
S 4th St I-43
S 5th St Pl
S 5th
S 6th St
W Holt
Ave
S 14th St S 14th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 12th St
S 20th Pl
S 22nd St S 22nd St
S 24th St
W
X
RIVE R
43
W Cleveland
Ave
St
Oregon
S Brust S
Kansas Ave
Ave
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
W Bruce St
3 II-4
W Becher St
S 7th St
Parkway
Parkway Dr
Dr
S 15th St
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
St
S 78th St
S 79th St
S 79th St
S 77th St
S 77th St S 78th St
S 78th St S 78th St
S 77th St
S 76th St S 76th St
St
77th
S
S 77th St S 75th
S
S
75th St S 75th St 75th St S 75th St
St S 75th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 75th St
S 73rd St S 73rd St S 73rd St S 74th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 73rd St S 72nd St
S 71st
S 72nd St
St
S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 71st St
S 72nd St S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St S 70th St
C
S 68th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
ro
St
68th
S
St
S
S
68th
69th
St
S
68t
h
St
S 67th St
cu
S 68th St
S 68th St
St
S 67th St S 68th
s
S 68th St
S 68th St
S 67th Pl
S 67th St
S 68th St S 68th St
C
WK
S 66th St
S
66th
St
S
66th
t
St
innic
S 66th St
S 67th St
S 65th St
S 67th St
kinn S 65th St
S 65th
St
66th
St
S
66th
S
S 66th St
ic
St
Rive
St
65th
S
S
St
65th
r
S
S
65th
St
S 64th St
6
4th S
Oakwood Ln
S 63rd St
S 64th St
Pky
t
Middleton Dr
S 64th St
S 63rd St
S 62nd St
S
62nd
St
St
Sta
63rd
S
St
63rd
S
Sq
Sunset
St
S 63rd
t
Badger Ct
Hig
S 62nd St
S 61st StS 62nd St S 62nd St
S 61st St
Mansfield
S 61st St
h wa e
S 62nd St
Dr
S 61st St
S Ha
S 60th St
y 36
S 60th St S 60th St S 61st St
S
60th
St
S
w
S 59th St S 59th St S 58th St ley R
S 60th St
Hig tate S 60th St
S 58th St
La
St
60th
S
St
60th
d
S
St
St
60th
h
S
60th
S
St
S 60th
S 60th St
way
S 60th St
S 58th St
ke
S 60th St
S 57th St S 58th St
S 58th St
36
S 57th St S 57th St
vie
St
58th
S
St
58th
S
S 57th St S 57th St
S Oak
w
Maplewood Dr
S 57th St
S 56th St
S 56th St
Ea Dr Lynn M
S 52nd Pl
Park Ct
S 56th St
St
56th
St
S
56th
S
eado
stw R
St
55th
S
St
G
55th
S
w D r re
ay d
S 55th St
S 55th St
53rd St
S 54th St S 53rd St S 53rd St
en
S 54th St SS52nd
S 54th St
br
St
St
53rd
S
S
St
oo
53rd
S
5
1
st St
W
S 52nd St
kT
S 52nd St
St
52nd
S
S
50th
St
E
e
lec
S 50th St S 51st St S 51st St S 51st St
WM
S 50th St
S 51st St
S 49th St
S 51st St r
S 51st St
tric
a
S 50th St S 50th St
S 49th St
Lea ple
S 48th St
Av
S 48th St 49th St S 49th St
f Ci r
e
S 49th St
S 47th St SS 48th St S 48th St
S 48th St
S 48th St S 48th St
St
S
46th
47th
S
St
St
47th
S
S 47th St S 47th St
St
46th
46th
S
S 45th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 45th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St
S 45th St
St S 45th St
S 45th St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
S 45th St S 45th St
S 44th St
S
43rd St
S 44th St
S 44th St
St
44th
S
S
43rd
St
H
S
S 43rd St
S 44th St
Miller Miller
S 43rd St
igh ta
S 43rd St
S 43rd St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 41st St
wa t e
S 43rd St S 43rd St S 43rd St S 43rd St
S 41st St
Park Park Way
St
42nd
S
y
S 42nd St
S 41st St S 40th St
S 41st St
36
Way
St
S 41st
S 39th S
S 38th St
S 40th St
S 40th St
t
S 40th St
S 39th St
Access Rd
S 38th St
S 38th St
S
37th
St
Sta S 39th St
H
S 38th St
S 38th St
igh te
S 36th St
SL
S 36th St
S 37th St
S 35t S 36th St S 36th St
wa
S 37th St
or
S 37th St
S 36th St
S 37th St
h St
S 35th St
S 36th St
S 35th St
y3
S 35th St
S 37th St
Av ene
S 35th St
S 35th St
6
S 34th St S 35th St S S S 35th St
e
S 34th St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 35th St
S 33rd St S 33rd St
S 33rd St S 34th St S 33rd St
Somerset Ln
S 35th St S 35th St
Av hea
S 35th St
S 34th St
S 32nd St
e
S 33rd St
S 31st St
S 31st St S 31st St S 31st St S 32nd St S 31st St S 32nd St
S
30t
h St S 31st St
S 30th St S 30th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 32nd St
S 31st St
S 29th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 31st St
S 30th St
S
28th
St
S 29th St
29th St
St
S
29th
S
St
29th
S
St
29th
S
S 28th St
S 28th St
S 27th St S 28th StS 28th St
S 27th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 25th St
S 26th St
S 25th St
S 27th St
S
St
26
26th
S
th
S2
St
S 24th St
St S 25th St S 25th St S 25th St
25th
S
4
S
St
S 26th
th
S 26th St
S 25th St
S 24th St
Ke
S 24th St
S 24th St S 24th St
Ct
S 23rd St
S 23rd St
n
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S 23rd St S 23rd St S 22nd St
S 22nd Pl
S 21st Pl
Av tucky
S 22nd Pl
S
e
S S 22nd St S 21st St
Pe
S 22nd St
S 21st St
M
ar
S 21st St
S 21st St
S 21st St
u
S 20th St
S 20th St S 21st St
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S
20th
l
St
St A ske
S 20th St
S 20th St
S
19th
St
S Aetna
St
St
20th
20th
S
S
S 21st St
v
S 19th St
g
St
St
S 19th St
20th
S
20th
S
e
o
S 19th St
S
S
18th
18t
St
h
St
St
St
19th
Blvd
S
19th
S
S 18th St
St
S 20th StS 20th St S 20th St
S 19th
S 18th St
S 17th St
S 17th St
S 19th St
S 18th St
S 19th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
S 17th St
I-94
S 17th St S 15th
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
S 17th St
S
S 17th St
15t
h Pl
N 16th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
St S 15th Pl
16th
S
I-94
I-94
St S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl W
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
W
S
14th St
S 15th St
S 15th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
in
S 14th St
S 15th St
S 13th St
Av dla S 14th St
S 14th St
S 14th St S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
k
e
S
12th
St
S
e
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St S 13th St 12thSSt
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
11th St
S 13th St S 13th St
S 12th St
S 13th St
S
10th
S
10th
St
St
S 11th St
S
10th
St
St
S 11th St S 11th
S 11th St
S 10th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St S 9th Pl S 10th St
S 10th St
S 10th St S 9th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 9th Pl S 9th Pl
S 8th St
S 9th Pl
S 8th St S 9th St
S 9th St
State S 8th St
S
7th
St
St
S 8th
S 8th St
S 8th St S 7th St
Highway 38
S 6th St S 7th St
S 6th St
S 8th St
S 7th St
Access Rd
St
6th
S
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
6th St
S
I-43
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 5th St
I-43 S 5th PlS 5th St S 5th Pl Acce
St
S 6th St
5th
S
S 5th St
ss Rd
S 4th St S 4th St
S 4th St
St
5th St
St
4th
S
S
5th
St
4th
S
S
S 5th St
S 2nd St S 2nd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 2nd St
S 3rd St S 3rd St
S 1st St
S 2nd St S 1st St
St S 2nd St
S 1st St
3rd
S
S
1st
Pl
S 3rd St
State
S 1st St S 1st St S 1st St
S
S 1st St
S 1st St
H
S 1st Pl
Highway 38
S Barclay St S Water
S 1st StA owell
S Burrell St
St S
ve
SH
Wa
S Austin St
S Whitnall
owe
S
ter
State
H
owell
Ave ll
S Austin St
St
Ave
38
y
Highwa
Ave S Brisbane
S Austin St
S Griffin Ave
S Allis St S Marina Dr
Ave
S Quincy
S Griffin
S Griffin
S Mound St
S Taylor
S Adams Ave
Ave
Ave
Ave
S Aldrich St
Ave
S Taylor Ave
S Taylor
S Pine
S Pine Ave
S Pine Ave
S
Ave
Ave
S Lenox St
He S Lenox St
S Logan
rm
S Logan
S Logan
an
Ave
Ave
S
St Hanson
Ave
S Clement
Ave
S Nevada St
Ave
I-794
S Nevada Ave
S Brust Ave
S 78th St
W Scott St
S 11th St
W Holt
Ave
S 25th St S 25th
rS
ine
KK-6
t
S 17th S
st
re
o
e
F
W Hom e
Av
S 17th St
S 18th St
W Lincoln W Lincoln
Ave
Ave
s
ye
W Ha
Ave W K
KINNICKINNIC R inni
ive cki
r P nni
ky c
S 21st St
S 24th St
S Layton S Layton
Blvd
Blvd
S 28th St
e
at 36
St ay
w
gh
Hi
ON
Teakwood Dr
S 43rd St
Ln
Ln
ony
Sax
n
sh L
arbu
Sug
r
gD
ge
W Colle
rlin Ste
e
t
rling Ct
S
Ave
rk Ln
Skyla
ILS
S 36th St
W Edgerton
Ave
SM
ale
nd
Lyn ve
W A
S 31st St
W
W OhioW Rusk
i
Ave
Po n St
eS
t
W Morgan
Ave
S 34th St
W Edgerton
Ave
S 31st St
S 35th St
S Ka
telyn
Cir
S 33rd St
KK-3
nic
nickin
W Kin er Pky
Riv
y
one
S H k Dr
Cree
W College
Ave
W Ohio
Ave
S 36th St
tional
W Na
Ave
State
Highway 57
S 28th St
S 29th St
W Mitchell St
t
S 38th S
S 40th St
ry L
Sur
n
tto
Su
pia
ym
Ol Dr
y
Eastwa
Ox
for
Dr d
Oakwoo
d St
S 48th St
e
sid
ke
La Dr
t
S 45th S
S 51st St
W Edgerton
r
y D Ave
e
l
r
o
M
S 44th St
Ln
rn
bu
ad
W
X
d St
t S 52n
S 53rd S K S 53rd St
S 54th St
EE
PARK
Northway
er
Mill k S 43rd St
Par
y
Wa
S 46th St
S 47th St
LYONS
e
gl
An Ln
S 57th St
Sherwood
Rd
R
KK-2
St
l
rP
he
c
Be
S 57th St
Enfield
Ave t
Con
S
ifer
on
Ln
t
s Darnell
y
a
u
E
uthw
Ln So ay
W
Devonsh
ire
Ave
Root
River
Pky
ay
ay
S 65th St
Millbank Rd
Mead Rd
W Edgerton
Ave
S 60th St
erial
S Imp
Cir
65th Ct
S 59th St
S 71st St
Fielding
Ln
Pl
er
y
e
r
l
th P
Stu
S 65th St
KK-8
W Tripo
li
W Howard
W Howard
A
v
e
KK-1
Ave
Ave
W Van
Beck Ave
W Tesch
W Water ford
WP
Ave
E Waterford Ave
lainf
Ave
field
in
la
P
ield P
W
W Leroy Ave
AR
Ave
K
Ave W Bolivar
W Bolivar
W Leroy
KK-7
W Cold W Bolivar
W Cold
3
I-4
Ave
Ave
W Cold W Cold
Ave
W Cold
I-43
Spring Rd Spring Rd Ave
W Martin Ln
Spring Rd Spring Rd ottsford
3
Spring Rd
WB
-I 4
Ave
rd
3
Bottsfo
W
e
v
A
W Van
n
4
W Allerto
Ie 4
W Armour
W Van Ave
at y 2
erton Ave
Norman Ave
All
t
W
S wa
W Colony Dr I-43 I-43 I-43 I-43
E Price
Ave
Norman
I-43
CREEK
I-43
I-43
gh
E Layton Ave
Ave
Hi I-43 I-43
W English
W Layton
Layton
W
W Armour Ave Meadows
Ave
W Layton Ave
Ave
Dr
W Layton
Ave
W Layton Ave
Ave W Layton Ave
ton
Lay
W
Ave
Layton
W
Ave
W Holt
Ave
nt
o
m
i
a rn
gia
Pl
or
W W AveW Eden
Ge v e
ve
A
r
W A
bu
Wil
W Crawford W W D
od
ge
Ave
Pl
W Howard
Ave
e 4
at 2
St way
gh
Hi
S 74th St
nw
re e
G
W Grange
Northw
S 46th
W Washington St
S 61st St
S 65th St
X
W
W
X
Stac
W
k Dr X
W
X
t
W
X
S
W tt
X
Benne
W
h W Bennett
t
4
7
Oklahoma Ave
W
Ave
W
X
S
Ave
W Lakefield Dr
WB
W Euclid Ave X
W
u rd
Ave ick
W
X
S 73rd St
S 76th St
S 79th St
S 78th St
I-94
S 65th St
S 68th St
y
ne y
Ho k P k
S 78th St W ree
C
Ave
r
Eat
on
S 76th St
Ln
S 76th St
S 76th St S 76th St
Eldon St
I-94
t
S 71st St S 71st St S 71st S
S 75th St
S 79th St
Overlook
D
RIVER
Map 5
STREAM CHANNEL AND BIOLOGICAL QUALITY CONDITIONS

WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2000-2009
Drop Structure
Dam
Concrete Lined
Enclosed
Stable
Eroding
Not Assessed
Very Poor
Poor
Fair
Good
No Fish
NA (Not Applicable For
Quality Rating Due To
Sampling Gear)
Very Poor
Poor
Fair
E Dale
Ave
E Ramsey
Ave
I-94
W Washington St
S 79th St
rk
Pa d
R
S Logan Ave
S Lenox St
S Quincy
Ave
St
R
d
Cir Park
r
e
R
d
u
a
E G E Gauer
Cir
S Pine
Ave
S Burrell St
S Clement Ave
S Logan
Ave
S 1st St
Dr
k
La
0.5
E Norse
Ave
E Grange
E Grange
E Grange Ave Ave
Ave
S Illinois Ave
Dr
11th Ave
e
ksid
re e
SC
S Barland
Ave
Carroll Ct t
kS
Tamaricac
H kory St
S Lipton
Ave
ic
inn
i ck
nn
Ki Ave
E Birchwood
Ave
S Packard Ave
S0h
or
e
S Troy
Ave
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
S Illinois
Ave
Be
n
S India Ave net
t
na
Ave
St
E Jones
E Greenfield
Ave
E College Ave
S Iowa
Ave
State
Highway 38
S 1st St
3rd
St
W Boden St
St
E Edgerton
Ave
ll
na
hit
S W Ave
all
hitn
S W Ave S Barland
Ave
E Rusk
Ave
E Oklahoma
Hi St
Ave
gh ate
ve
wa
st A
e
r
c
l
l
y3
i
E Ohio
EH
2
o
i
h
O
Ave
E
e
Holt
E
v
A
E Vollmer Ave
E Carol St
E Morgan
Ave E Morgan
St
E
Ave
Ave
s
E Warnimont Franci
Ave
Ave
h
bet
liza e
nig
E
E Saveland
E Av E Koe
e
Ave
Av
nig
E Tripoli
oe
Van
E Howard E
E K ve
Ave
ck
A
Be
Ave
h
E Norwich
E Norwic Ave
E Norwich AveAveWaterford
Ave
E
E Denton Ave
E Denton
Ave
EL
E Leroy Ave
e ro
yA
ve Ave E Whittaker
Ave
E Van
E Van
Norman
Norman
r
Ave E Armou
Ave
Ave
E Cudahy
E Price Ave
SW
hitn Ave
E Layton
all A S
ve Wh E Layton Ave
Ave
Av itna
e ll
E Somers
Ave
S Arctic
St
Ave
len
El S Iowa
S
Ave
S Kansas
Ave
W Edgerton
Ave
E Joseph
M
Hutsteine
r Dr
S Arctic
Ave
Iro
S Kansas
Ave
S Iowa
Ave
o
EP
Pa
rk
S Logan
Ave
S 1st St
S 2nd St
I-43
S 6th St
S 5th St
W Uncas
Ave
W College
St
W College Ave Ave
E Otjen St
Ave
tter
ger
bar
th
or Line er
T
tw S
en e
W Av t
S
S S St
t
r
4
S S St ClaiSt
I-79
ay
lair
r Dr
C
tSB
arbo t
S Logan
4
ay S
SH
I-79
Ave
yS SB
r Dr
arbo
ry Dr E Ba cess Rd
S HS Carfer
Ac
S Aldrich St
S Adams
Ave
th
S4
S 6th St
#
*
E Smith St
I-794
dale
ose
W R Ave
te
Sta y 38
a
hw
Hig
I-43
Ct
S 5th
S 9th St
an
ad
a
S 7th St
S 18th St
Gr
S 6th St
S 7th St
t
nd S
S 12th St
t
S 16th S
KK-5
State H
ighway
ge
119
an
r
G e
W Av
r
i
W Grange Ave W A ay
W Grange Ave
KK-4
oW
g
r
a
e
t
C
W Klein
Sta y 119
a
Ave
hw
Hig
ion
itat
W Goldcrest
E C ay
W
Ave
W Iona Ter
W Upham
Ave
W Edgerton
Ave
W Abbott
Ave
W Cleveland
Ave
S 1st St S 1st St
W Becher St
o
ins
ob
S R Ave
RIVE R
S 2nd St S 2nd St
W Hayes
Ave
S 4th St I-43
S 5th St Pl
S 5th
S 6th St
#
*
S 14th St S 14th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 21st St
S 22
W Kimberly
Ave
W Mangold Ave
W Alvina
W Alvina Ave
Ave
ey
on r
H kD
S ree
C
W Goldcrest
Ave W Ramsey
Ave
S 15th St
Parkway
Parkway Dr
Dr
43
W Becher St
S 7th St
t
S 17th S
st
re
Fo me
W Ho e
Av
KK-11
S Ace
Industrial Dr
5th
5th
794
794
5th 794
S Delaware
5th 794 In
5th 5th 794
ternation
Ave
al Dr
794
SN
S Indiana Ave
i
c
h
Ave
a
a
Indian
S
S Indian
o
S Illinois
Ave lson
Ave S Illinois
Ave
S Merill Ave Ave
S Robert Ave
S Elaine
14th Ave
S Barland
Ave
14th
Ave S Mc
Ave
Creedy
S Kingan
Ave
1th
S Packard
Ave
S Kingan
ve
S Packard Ave
Ave
Ave
W Bruce St
W National
W Pierce St
Ave
W Walker St
Acc
ess
W Mineral St
Rd
S Brust S
Kansas Ave
Ave
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
W Bruce St
St
W Scott St
3 II-4
S 11th St
S 17th St
S 18th St
S 20th Pl
S 22nd St S 22nd St
W Holmes
W Halsey Ave
Ave
W
W Edgerton
Edgerton
ton
W Edger
Ave
Ave
Ave
S 26th St
S 78th St
St
Oregon
rie
EE
S 21st St
S 24th St
W Grange
W Wanda Ave
Ave
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
St
hwood
W Birc
Ave
S 25th St S 25th
KK-6
S 24th St
#
*
W Lincoln W Lincoln
Ave
Ave
yes
W Ha
Ave W K
KINNICKINNIC R inni
ive cki
r P nni
ky c
S 26th St
S 28th St
rS
ine
y
S Hone
Dr
Creek
W Ramsey
Ave
ON
SM
#
*
ILS
S 36th St
W Edgerton
Ave
S 31st St
S Ka
telyn
Cir
S Layton
Blvd
S 34th St
Teakwood Dr
S 43rd St
Ln
Ln
ony
Sax
n
sh L
arbu
Sug
r
gD
ge
W Colle
rlin Ste
e
t
rling Ct
S
Ave
rk Ln
Skyla
S 31st St
S 35th St
S 33rd St
#
*
nic
nickin
W Kin er Pky
Riv
ry L
Sur
n
tto
Su
W College
Ave
W Edgerton
Ave
y
one
S H k Dr
Cree
S 48th St
e
sid
ke r
a
L D
t
S 45th S
W Edgerton
r
y D Ave
S 46th St
S 51st St
pia
ym
Ol Dr
y
Eastwa
Ox
for
Dr d
Oakwoo
d St
#
*
S 36th St
tional
W Na
Ave
S 28th St
S 29th St
W Mitchell St
t
S 38th S
S 40th St
Ln
er
Mill k S 43rd St
Par
y
Wa
S 46th St
S 47th St
rn
bu
ad
d St
t S 52n
S 54th St
EE
PARK
rle
Mo
LYONS
65th Ct
St
S 60th St
Stac
kD
S 44th St
S 46th
S 59th St
erial
S Imp
Cir
Sherwood
Rd
KK-2
S 57th St
Pl
S 65th St
Millbank Rd
Mead Rd
W Edgerton
Ave
l
rP
he
c
Be
S 57th St
l
th P
Stu
S 65th St
S 68th St
S 71st St
S 74th St
Root
River
Pky
S 61st St
er
re y
S 65th St
S 73rd St
S 76th St
r
Eat
on
S 76th St
Ln
S 76th St
S 76th St S 76th St
Eldon St
I-94
S 65th St
t
S 75th St
S 79th St
S 79th St
S 77th St
S 77th St S 78th St
S 78th St S 78th St
S
76th
St
S 77th St
S 76th St S 76th St
St
S 77th St S 75th S 77th S 75th St
S
S
St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 75th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 73rd St S 72nd St
S 71st
S 72nd St
St
S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 71st St
S 72nd St S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St S 70th St
C
S 68th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
ro
St
68th
S
St
69th
S
S
S
68th
St
68t
h
S 67th St
St
cu
S 68th St
S 68th St
S 67th St S 68th StPl
s
S 68th St
S 68th St
S 67th
S 67th St
S 68th St S 68th St
C
WK
S 66th St
S
66th
St
S
66th
t
St
innic
S 66th St
S 67th St
S 65th St
S 67th St
kinn S 65th St
S 65th
St
66th
St
S
66th
S
S 66th St
ic
St
Rive
St
65th
S
S
St
65th
S
r
S
65th
St
S 64th St
6
4th S
Oakwood Ln
S 63rd St
S 64th St
Pky
t
Middleton Dr
S 64th St
S 63rd St
S 62nd St
S
62nd
St
St
Sta
63rd
S
St
63rd
Sq
Sunset
S
St
S 63rd
t
Badger Ct
Hig
S 62nd St
S 61st St
Mansfield
S 61st St
h wa e
S 62nd St
Dr
S 61st St
S Ha
S 60th St
y 36
S
60th
St
S
w
S 60th St
Hig tate S 60th St
S 58th St
La
St
60th
S
St
60th
d
S
St
St
60th
h
S
60th
S
St
S 60th
S 60th St
way
S 58th St
S 60th St
ke
S 60th St
S 57th St S 58th St
S 58th St
36
S 57th St S 57th St
vie
St
58th
S
St
58th
S
St
S 57th St S 57th St
S Oak
w
Maplewood Dr
S 57th St S 57th
S 57th St
S 56th St
S 56th St
Ea Dr Lynn Me
S 52nd Pl
Park Ct
S 56th St S 56th St
St
St
56th
S
56th
S
stw R
St
55th
S
adow G
St
55th
S
ay d
S 55th St
D r re e
S 55th St
53rd St
S 54th St SS52nd
nb
S 54th St
St
S 53rd St
ro
S
St
53rd
S
5
1
ok
st St
W
S 52nd St
S 52nd St
St
52nd
S
S
50th
St
E
Te
lec
WM
S 50th St
S 51st St
S 49th St
S 51st St r
S 51st St
tric
a
S 50th St S 50th St
S 49th St
Lea ple
S 48th St
Av
S 48th St
f Ci r
St S 49th St
e
S 49th St
S 47th St SS49th
S 48th St
48th St S 48th St
S 48th St S 48th St
St
S
46th
47th
S
St
St
47th
S
S 47th St S 47th St
S 45th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 45th St 46th S 46th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St S 45th St
S 45th St
St S 45th St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
S 45th St S 45th St
S 44th St
S
43rd St
S 44th St
St
44th
S
St
44th
S
S
43rd
St
H
S
S 43rd St
S 44th St
Miller Miller
S 43rd St
igh ta
S 43rd St
S 43rd St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 41st St
wa t e
S 41st St
Park Park Way
St
42nd
S
y
S 42nd St
S 41st St S 40th St
S 41st St
36
Way
St
S 41st
S 39th S
S 38th St
S 40th St
S 40th St
t
S 40th St
S 39th St
Access Rd
S 38th St
S 38th St
S
37th
St
Sta S 39th St
H
S 38th St
igh te
S 38th St
S 36th St
SL
S 36th St
S 37th St
wa
S 37th St
or
S 37th St
S 36th St
S 37th St
h St
S 35th St
S 36th St
y3
S 35th St
S 35th St
S 37th St
Av ene
S 35th St
6
S 35th St
e
S 34th St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 35th St
S 33rd St S 33rd St
S 35th St S 35th St
Somerset Ln
Av hea
S 35th St
S 34th St
S 32nd St
e
S 33rd St
S 31st St
S
30t
h St S 31st St
S 30th St S 30th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 32nd St
S 31st St
S 29th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 31st St
S 30th St
S
28th
St
S 29th St
S 29th St
S 29th St S 29th St
S 29th St
S 28th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
State
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 25th St
S 25th St
Highway 57
S 27th St
S
St
26
26th
S
th
S2
St
S 24th St
4th
SK
S 26th St
S 25th St
S 26th St
S 24th St
St
24th
S
S 24th St S 24th St
Ct
e
S 23rd St
S 23rd St
n
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S 22nd Pl
S 21st Pl
Av tucky
S 22nd Pl
S
e
Pe
S 22nd St
S 21st St
M
ar
S 21st St
S 21st St
S 21st St
u
S 20th St S 21st St
S 20th St
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S
20th
l
St
St A ske
S 20th St
S 20th St
S
19th
St
S Aetna
St
St
20th
20th
S
S
S 21st St
v
S 19th St
g
St
St
S 19th St
20th
S
20th
S
e
o
S 19th St
S
S
18th
18t
St
h
St
St
St
19th
Blvd
S
19th
S
S 18th St
St
S 19th
S 18th St
S 17th St
S 17th St
S 19th St
S 18th St
S 19th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
S 17th St
I-94
S 17th St S 15th
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
S 17th St
I-94
S
S 17th St
15t
h Pl
N 16th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
St S 15th Pl
16th
S
I-94
I-94
St S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl W
S 15th Pl
W
S
14th St
S 15th St
S 15th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
in
S 14th St
S 15th St
S 13th St
Av dla S 14th St
S 14th St
S 14th St S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
k
e
S
12th
St
S
e
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
11th St
S 13th St S 13th St
S 12th St
S 13th St
S
10th
S
St
10th
St
S 11th St
S
10th
St
St
S 11th St S 11th
S 11th St
S 10th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 10th St S 9th St
S 9th Pl
S 9th Pl S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 8th St
S 8th St S 9th St
S 9th Pl
S 9th St
State S 8th St
S
7th
St
S 8th St
S 8th St
S 8th St S 7th St
Highway 38
S 6th St S 7th St
S 6th St
S 8th St
S 7th St
Access Rd
St
6th
S
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
6th St
S
I-43
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 5th St
St
S 6th St
5th
S
S 5th St
ss Rd
S 4th St S 4th St
S 4th St
St
5th St
St
4th
S
S
5th
St
4th
S
S
S 5th St
S 2nd St S 2nd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 2nd St
S 3rd St S 3rd St
S 1st St
S 2nd St S 1st St
St S 2nd St
S 1st St
3rd
S
S
1st
Pl
S 3rd St
State
S
S 1st St
S 1st St
H
S 1st Pl
Highway 38
S 1st StA owell
S Burrell St
St S
ve
SH
Wa
S Austin St
S Whitnall
owe
ter
S
State
H
owell
Ave ll
S Austin St
St
Ave
38
y
Highwa
S Austin St
Ave S Brisbane
S Griffin Ave
Ave
S Quincy
S Griffin
S Griffin
S Mound St
S Taylor
S Adams Ave
Ave
Ave
Ave
S Aldrich St
Ave
S Taylor Ave
S Taylor
S Pine
S Pine Ave
Pine Ave
S
Ave
S
Ave
S Lenox St
He S Lenox St
S Logan
S Logan
rm
S Logan
an
Ave
Ave
St
Ave
S Clement
S Clement
S Nevada St
Ave
Ave
I-794
S Nevada Ave
S Brust Ave

S 76th St
S 76th St
S 75th St
S 76th St S 76th St
S 75th St
r
KK-3
St
Bennett
W
t
h
net
Ben
W
t
a
om
74
Ave W Oklahoma Ave
lah
S
k
Ave
KK-10 W O Ave
W Lakefield Dr
W
WB
R
W Euclid Ave
io
u
Oh
W
urd
W skin
Ave
Ave ick
S
Po
W Holt
e S t W Holt
W Holt
Ave
Ave
E Holt Ave
t
Ave
W Morgan
t
n
Ave
imo
ia
e
arn W Eden Pl
rg
at 36
W
o
e
St ay
W
Av
e
Ge v e
w
v
riffin
rA
gh
W A
SG e
ilbu
Hi
ale
W
d
Av
n
KK-8
W Crawford W W Do
Lyn ve
d
E Howard
W
ge
A
W Howard
W Tripo
W Howard
Ave
Pl
li Ave
Ave
KK-1
Ave
W Howard
Ave
W Van
E Norwich
Ave
Beck Ave
e 4
Ave
at 2
W Tesch
W Water ford
St way
W
Ave
Plai
E Waterford Ave
field
Ave
gh
nfiel
W Plain
Hi
d PA
W Leroy Ave
Ave
R
K
Ave W Bolivar
W Bolivar
W Leroy
KK-7
W Cold W Bolivar
W Cold
d
ol
e
C
I-43
Ave
Av
Cold
W
W
Ave
W Cold
Ave
Rd
g
I-43
Spring Rd Sprin
W Martin Ln
g Rd
Rd
rin
Spring
Sp
rd
3
fo
s
Rd
tt
Spring
W Bo
-4
I
Ave
rd
3
W Bottsfo
Ave
W Van
W Allerton
I-4
e 4
W Van Ave
W Armour
at y 2
erton Ave
Norman Ave
All
t
W
S wa
E Price
Ave
Norman
I-43
CREEK
I-43
I-43
gh
Ave
Layton
E
Hi I-43 I-43 Ave
W English
Layton
W
W Layton
Ave
W Layton Ave
Ave
Dr
W Layton
Ave
W
Layton
Ave
Layton Ave
W Layton Ave W Layton Ave W
Ave
S 78th St
y
ne y
Ho k P k
S 78th St W ree
C
S 78th St
S 79th St
ay
nw
e
e
r
e
W Grange G
gl
An Ln
Ave
Northw
ay
Northway
Enfield
Ave t
Con
S
ifer
n
Ln
o
t
s
Fielding
ay
Eu Darnell Southw
Ln
Ln
Way
Devonsh
ire
Ave
Overlook
D
Map 6
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR AND PLANT COMMUNITY CONDITIONS WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
Plant Community
Floristic Quality Index (FQI)
10 - 19 Poor
20 - 29 Fair
30 - 39 Good
40 - 49 Very Good
50 - 59 Excellent
Riparian Corridor
Buffer Widths
Greater than or equal to 75 Feet
Less than 75 Feet
Enclosed Channel
Primary Environmental
Corridor
Secondary Environmental
Corridor
Isolated Natural
Resource Area
1 Miles
Source: SEWRPC.
E Dale
Ave
E Ramsey
Ave

S 76th St
S 76th St
S 75th St
S 76th St S 76th St
S 75th St
ger
bar
th
or Line er
T
tw S
en e
W Av t
S
S S St
t
r
4
S S St ClaiSt
I-79
ay
lair
r Dr
C
tSB
arbo t
S Logan
4
ay S
SH
I-79
Ave
yS SB
r Dr
arbo
ry Dr E Ba cess Rd
S HS Carfer
Ac
S Aldrich St
rk
Pa d
R
E Otjen St
e
r Av
otte
EP
Pa
rk
R
d
Cir Park
r
e
R
d
u
a
E G E Gauer
Cir
S Adams
Ave
S Logan Ave
S Lenox St
S Quincy
Ave
S Logan
Ave
S 1st St
S 1st St
S Pine
Ave
S Burrell St
S Clement Ave
S Logan
Ave
S 2nd St
I-43
E Edgerton
Ave
ll
na
hit
S W Ave
all
hitn
S W Ave S Barland
Ave
E Grange
E Grange
E Grange Ave Ave
Ave
S Illinois Ave
0.5
NOTE: Groundwater recharge areas are generally

delineated based on regional-scale data.
Project design will require additional
on-site assessments.
Dr
11th Ave
e
ksid
re e
SC
S Barland
Ave
Carroll Ct t
kS
Tamaricac
H kory St
S Lipton
Ave
ic
inn
i ck
nn
Ki Ave
E Birchwood
Ave
k
La
E Norse
Ave
Dr
S Packard Ave
Sh
or
e
S Troy
Ave
S Illinois
Ave
Be
n
S India Ave net
t
na
Ave
St
E Jones
E Greenfield
Ave
S Arctic
Ave
E Rusk
Ave
Source: SEWRPC.
E Oklahoma
Hi St
Ave
e
gh ate
t Av
wa
s
e
r
c
l
l
y3
i
Ohio
E
EH
2
o
i
h
Ave
EO e
Holt
E
v
A
E Vollmer Ave
E Carol St
E Morgan
Ave E Morgan
St
E
Ave
Ave
E Warnimont Francis
Ave
Ave
h
bet
liza e
nig
E
E Saveland
E Av E Koe
Ave
ve
ig
A
n
E Tripoli
oe
Van
E Howard E
E K ve
Ave
ck
A
Be
Ave
h
E Norwich
E Norwic Ave
Ave
E
E Denton Ave
E Denton
Ave
EL
E Leroy Ave
e ro
yA
ve Ave E Whittaker
Ave
E Van
E Van
Norman
Norman
r
Ave E Armou
Ave
Ave
E Cudahy
E Price Ave
SW
hitn Ave
E Layton
all A S
ve Wh E Layton Ave
Ave
Av itna
e ll
E Somers
Ave
S Iowa
Ave
State
Highway 38
S 1st St
3rd
St
E College Ave
St
S Arctic
St
Ave
len
El S Iowa
S
Ave
S Kansas
Ave
W Edgerton
Ave
E Joseph
M
Hutsteine
r Dr
S Kansas
Ave
S Iowa
Ave
Iro
S Ace
Industrial Dr
5th
5th
794
794
5th 794
S Delaware
5th 794 In
5th 5th 794
ternation
Ave
al Dr
794
SN
S Indiana Ave
i
c
h
Ave
a
a
Indian
S
S Indian
o
S Illinois
Ave lson
Ave S Illinois
Ave
S Merill Ave Ave
S Robert Ave
S Elaine
14th Ave
S Barland
Ave
14th
Ave S Mc
Ave
Creedy
S Kingan
Ave
1th
S Packard
Ave
S Kingan
Ave
S Packard Ave
Ave
Ave
I-794
St
St
W Boden St
W Uncas
Ave
W College
St
W College Ave Ave
dale
ose
R
W Ave
o
ins
ob
S R Ave
E Smith St
S Brust S
Kansas Ave
Ave
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
W Pierce St
W Bruce St
W National
Ave
W Walker St
Acc
ess
W Mineral St
Rd
ri e
EE
W Becher St
S 1st St S 1st St
KK-11
te
Sta y 38
a
hw
Hig
S 6th St
S 5th St
S 9th St
an
ad
a
W Edgerton
Ave
W Abbott
Ave
th
S4
State H
ighway
ge
119
an
r
G e
W Av
ir
A
W Grange Ave W
W Grange Ave
KK-4
Way
argo
te
C
a
9
t
W Klein
S y 11
a
Ave
hw
Hig
ion
itat
W Goldcrest
E C ay
W
Ave
W Iona Ter
S 7th St
Gr
S 6th St
KK-5
W Upham
Ave
S 6th St
S 7th St
t
nd S
S 18th St
ey
on r
H kD
S ree
C
I-43
Ct
S 5th
t
S 16th S
S 21st St
S 22
y
S Hone
Dr
Creek
W Kimberly
Ave
W Mangold Ave
W Alvina
W Alvina Ave
Ave
W Hayes
Ave
S 4th St I-43
S 5th St Pl
S 5th
S 6th St
S 12th St
S 14th St S 14th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 20th Pl
W Holmes
W Halsey Ave
Ave
W
W Edgerton
Edgerton
W Edgerton
Ave
Ave
Ave
S 26th St
Teakwood Dr
S 43rd St
W Goldcrest
Ave W Ramsey
Ave
St
Oregon
S 2nd St S 2nd St
W Cleveland
Ave
RIVE R
43
S 78th St
S 79th St
S 79th St
S 77th St
S 77th St S 78th St
S 78th St S 78th St
S
76th
St
S 77th St
S 76th St S 76th St
St
S
S
St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 75th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 73rd St S 72nd St
S 71st
S 72nd St
St
S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 71st St
S 72nd St S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St S 70th St
C
S 68th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
ro
St
68th
S
St
69th
S
S
S
68th
St
68t
h
S 67th St
St
cu
S 68th St
S 68th St
s
S 68th St
S 68th St
S 67th
S 67th St
S 68th St S 68th St
C
WK
S 66th St
S
66th
St
S
66th
t
St
innic
S 66th St
S 67th St
S 65th St
S 67th St
kinn S 65th St
S 65th
St
66th
St
S
66th
S
S 66th St
ic
St
Rive
St
65th
S
S
St
65th
S
r
S
65th
St
S 64th St
6
4th S
Oakwood Ln
S 63rd St
S 64th St
Pky
t
Middleton Dr
S 64th St
S 63rd St
S 62nd St
S
62nd
St
St
Sta
63rd
S
St
63rd
Sq
Sunset
S
St
S 63rd
t
Badger Ct
Hig
S 62nd St
S 61st St
Mansfield
S 61st St
h wa e
S 62nd St
Dr
S 61st St
S Ha
S 60th St
y 36
S
60th
St
S
w
S 60th St
Hig tate S 60th St
S 58th St
La
St
60th
S
St
60th
d
S
St
St
60th
h
S
60th
S
St
S 60th
S 60th St
way
S 60th St
S 58th St
ke
S 60th St
S 57th St S 58th St
S 58th St
36
S 57th St S 57th St
vie
St
58th
S
St
58th
S
St
S 57th St S 57th St
S Oak
w
Maplewood Dr
S 57th St S 57th
S 57th St
S 56th St
S 56th St
Ea Dr Lynn Me
S 52nd Pl
Park Ct
S 56th St S 56th St
St
St
56th
S
56th
S
stw R
St
55th
S
adow G
St
55th
S
ay d
S 55th St
D r re e
S 55th St
53rd St
S 54th St SS52nd
nb
S 54th St
St
S 53rd St
ro
S
St
53rd
S
5
1
ok
st St
W
S 52nd St
S 52nd St
St
52nd
S
S
50th
St
E
Te
lec
WM
S 50th St
S 51st St
S 49th St
S 51st St r
S 51st St
tric
a
S 50th St S 50th St
S 49th St
Lea ple
S 48th St
Av
S 48th St
f Ci r
St S 49th St
e
S 49th St
S 47th St SS49th
S 48th St
48th St S 48th St
S 48th St S 48th St
St
S
46th
47th
S
St
St
47th
S
S 47th St S 47th St
S 45th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St S 45th St
S 45th St
St S 45th St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
S 45th St S 45th St
S 44th St
S
43rd St
S 44th St
St
44th
S
St
44th
S
S
43rd
St
H
S
S 43rd St
S 44th St
Miller Miller
S 43rd St
igh ta
S 43rd St
S 43rd St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 41st St
wa t e
S 41st St
Park Park Way
St
42nd
S
y
S 42nd St
S 41st St S 40th St
S 41st St
36
Way
St
S 41st
S 39th S
S 38th St
S 40th St
S 40th St
t
S 40th St
S 39th St
Access Rd
S 38th St
S 38th St
S
37th
St
Sta S 39th St
H
S 38th St
igh te
S 38th St
S 36th St
SL
S 36th St
S 37th St
wa
S 37th St
or
S 37th St
S 36th St
S 37th St
h St
S 35th St
S 36th St
y3
S 35th St
S 35th St
S 37th St
Av ene
S 35th St
6
S 35th St
e
S 34th St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 35th St
S 33rd St S 33rd St
Somerset Ln
S 35th St S 35th St
Av hea
S 35th St
S 34th St
S 32nd St
e
S 33rd St
S 31st St
S
30t
h St S 31st St
S 30th St S 30th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 32nd St
S 31st St
S 29th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 31st St
S 30th St
S
28th
St
S 29th St
S 29th St
S 29th St S 29th St
S 29th St
S 28th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
State
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 25th St
S 25th St
Highway 57
S 27th St
S
St
26
26th
S
th
S2
St
S 24th St
4th
SK
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 25th St
S 24th St
St
24th
S
S 24th St S 24th St
Ct
e
S 23rd St
S 23rd St
n
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S 22nd Pl
S 21st Pl
Av tucky
S 22nd Pl
S
e
Pe
S 22nd St
S 21st St
M
ar
S 21st St
S 21st St
S 21st St
u
S 20th St
S 20th St S 21st St
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S
20th
l
St
St A ske
S 20th St
S 20th St
S
19th
St
S Aetna
St
St
20th
20th
S
S
S 21st St
v
S 19th St
g
St
St
S 19th St
20th
S
20th
S
e
o
S 19th St
S
S
18th
18t
St
h
St
St
St
19th
Blvd
S
19th
S
S 18th St
St
S 19th
S 18th St
S 17th St
S 17th St
S 19th St
S 18th St
S 19th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
S 17th St
I-94
S 17th St S 15th
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
S 17th St
S
S 17th St
15t
h Pl
N 16th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
St S 15th Pl
16th
S
I-94
I-94
St S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl W
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
W
S
14th St
S 15th St
S 15th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
in
S 14th St
S 15th St
S 13th St
Av dla S 14th St
S 14th St
S 14th St S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
k
e
S
12th
St
S
e
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
11th St
S 13th St S 13th St
S 12th St
S 13th St
S
10th
S
St
10th
St
S 11th St
S
10th
St
St
S 11th St S 11th
S 11th St
S 10th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 10th St S 9th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 9th Pl S 9th Pl
S 8th St
S 9th Pl
S 8th St S 9th St
S 9th St
State S 8th St
S
7th
St
S 8th St
S 8th St
S 8th St S 7th St
Highway 38
S 6th St S 7th St
S 6th St
S 8th St
S 7th St
Access Rd
St
6th
S
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
6th St
S
I-43
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 5th St
St
S 6th St
5th
S
S 5th St
ss Rd
S 4th St S 4th St
S 4th St
St
5th St
St
4th
S
S
5th
St
4th
S
S
S 5th St
S 2nd St S 2nd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 2nd St
S 3rd St S 3rd St
S 1st St
S 2nd St S 1st St
St S 2nd St
S 1st St
3rd
S
S
1st
Pl
S 3rd St
State
S
S 1st St
S 1st St
H
S 1st Pl
Highway 38
S 1st StA owell
S Burrell St
St S
ve
SH
Wa
S Austin St
S Whitnall
owe
ter
S
State
H
owell
Ave ll
S Austin St
St
Ave
38
y
Highwa
S Austin St
Ave S Brisbane
S Griffin Ave
Ave
S Quincy
S Griffin
S Griffin
S Mound St
S Taylor
S Adams Ave
Ave
Ave
Ave
S Aldrich St
Ave
S Taylor Ave
S Taylor
S Pine
S Pine Ave
Pine Ave
S
Ave
S
Ave
S Lenox St
He S Lenox St
S Logan
S Logan
rm
S Logan
an
Ave
Ave
St
Ave
S Clement
S Clement
S Nevada St
Ave
Ave
I-794
S Nevada Ave
S Brust Ave
S 78th St
W Bruce St
3 II-4
W Becher St
S 7th St
Parkway
Parkway Dr
Dr
S 15th St
S 24th St
S 22nd St S 22nd St
St
rS
ine
W Grange
W Wanda Ave
Ave
W Scott St
S 11th St
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
S 25th St S 25th
ON
SM
KK-6
t
S 17th S
st
re
o
e
F
W Hom e
Av
S 17th St
S 18th St
W Lincoln W Lincoln
Ave
Ave
s
e
y
W Ha
Ave W K
KINNICKINNIC R inni
ive cki
r P nni
ky c
S 21st St
S 24th St
S 26th St
ILS
n
sh L
arbu
Sug
r
gD
ge
W Colle
rlin Ste
e
t
rling Ct
S
Ave
rk Ln
Skyla
Ln
Ln
ony
Sax
hwood
W Birc
Ave
W Ramsey
Ave
S 31st St
S 36th St
y
one
S H k Dr
Cree
S 28th St
S 34th St
W Edgerton
Ave
S Layton
Blvd
S 31st St
S 35th St
S Ka
telyn
Cir
S 33rd St
nic
nickin
W Kin er Pky
Riv
t
S 45th S
ry L
Sur
n
tto
Su
W College
Ave
S 48th St
e
sid
ke r
a
L D
S 46th St
S 51st St
pia
ym
Ol Dr
y
Eastwa
Ox
for
Dr d
Oakwoo
d St
W Edgerton
Ave
S 36th St
tional
W Na
Ave
S 28th St
S 29th St
W Mitchell St
t
S 38th S
S 40th St
W Edgerton
r
y D Ave
e
l
r
o
M
S 44th St
er
Mill k S 43rd St
Par
y
Wa
S 46th St
S 47th St
Ln
d St
t S 52n
S 54th St
EE
PARK
rn
bu
ad
LYONS
Sherwood
Rd
R
S 60th St
65th Ct
S 59th St
erial
S Imp
Cir
y
wa
S 65th St
Millbank Rd
Mead Rd
W Edgerton
Ave
Stac
kD
S 57th St
Pl
KK-2
St
l
rP
he
c
Be
S 57th St
l
th P
Stu
S 65th St
S 68th St
S 71st St
r
KK-3
St
W Bennett
h W Bennett
t
a
4
a
om
om
7
Ave
Ave W Oklah
lah
S
k
Ave
KK-10 W O Ave
W Lakefield Dr
W
WB
R
W Euclid Ave
io
W Oh W usk
u rd
i
Ave
Ave ick
Po n St W Holt
W Holt
eS
W Holt
Ave
Ave
E Holt Ave
t
Ave
W Morgan
nt
Ave
imo
ia
e
arn W Eden Pl
rg
at 36
W
o
St ay
W
Ave ve
Ge v e
w
riffin
rA
gh
W A
SG e
ilbu
Hi
ale
W
d
Av
n
KK-8
W Crawford W W Do
Lyn ve
d
E Howard
W
ge
A
W Howard
W Tripo
W Howard
Ave
Pl
li Ave
Ave
KK-1
Ave
W Howard
Ave
W Van
E Norwich
Ave
Beck Ave
e 4
Ave
at 2
W Tesch
W Water ford
St way
W
Ave
Plai
E Waterford Ave
field
Ave
gh
nfiel
W Plain
Hi
d PA
W Leroy Ave
Ave
R
K
Ave W Bolivar
W Bolivar
W Leroy
KK-7
W Cold W Bolivar
Cold
W
d
ol
e
C
I-43
Ave
Av
W Cold
W
Ave
W Cold
Ave
I-43
Spring Rd Spring Rd
W Martin Ln
3
Spring Rd
WB
-I 4
Ave
3
W Bottsford
Ave
W Van
W Allerton
I-4
e 4
W Van Ave
W Armour
at y 2
erton Ave
Norman Ave
All
t
W
S wa
E Price
Ave
Norman
I-43
CREEK
I-43
I-43
gh
Ave
Layton
E
Hi I-43 I-43 Ave
W English
W Layton
W Layton
Ave
Ave
Layton
W
Ave
Dr
W Layton
Ave
W Layton Ave
Layton Ave
Ave
S 74th St
Root
River
Pky
S 46th
W Washington St
S 61st St
er
re y
S 65th St
S 73rd St
S 76th St
S 79th St
S 78th St
I-94
S 65th St
t
y
ne y
Ho k P k
S 78th St W ree
C
n
re e
e
W Grange G
gl
An Ln
Ave
Northw
ay
Northway
Enfield
Ave t
Con
S
ifer
Ln
on
t
s Darnell
y
Fielding
a
u
E
uthw
Ln
Ln So ay
W
Devonsh
ire
Ave
r
Eat
on
S 76th St
Ln
S 76th St
S 76th St S 76th St
Eldon St
I-94
S 75th St
S 79th St
Overlook
D
Map 7
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR CONDITIONS AND GROUNDWATER

RECHARGE POTENTIAL WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
Riparian Corridor
Buffer Widths
Less than 75 Feet
Enclosed Channel
Corridor
Corridor
Agricultural Land
Groundwater Recharge Potential

Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Undefined (Generally discharge areas)
1 Miles
E Dale
Ave
E Ramsey
Ave
d Ln
Beechwood Dr
N Pebble Ln
N Lake Dr
N Tennyson Dr
N Bayside Dr
N Regent Rd
at
er
Ln
N Poplar Dr
By
w
E
N Boyd Way
Dr
NB
ea
ch
N Santa Monica Blvd
N
Ba
rne Bel
t t L mo
n
nt
Ln
N Yates Rd
N Mohawk Rd
N Seneca Ave N Seneca Rd
N 16th St
N Prospect Ave
N Downer Ave
N Shepard Ave
N Hackett Ave
N 12th St
e
Av
ce
Te
rra
N 12th St
N 10th St
N 11th St
N 12th Ln
N 14th St
N 17th St
N Maryland Ave
Tree R
d
N Elm
N 13th St
N 14th St
N 16th St
N 18th St
N 19th St
N 21st St
N 23rd St
N 15th Ln
N 17th St
N 21st St
N 19th St
N 23rd St
N 23rd St
N 21st Ln
State Highway 57
N 24th St
N 24th Pl
N 25th St
N Lake Shore Dr
N Navajo Rd
N Pheasant Ln
I-43
N Chadwick Rd
N Pheasant Ln
N Skyline Ln
N Milwaukee River Pky

N Sunny Point Rd
N 15th St
N 14th St
N 19th St
N 17th St
N 16th St
N 22nd St
N 22nd St
N 24th St
N 24th St
N 25th St
N 26th St
N 26th St
N 26th St
SW
hit
na
ll A
ve
Stat
W Goldcrest Ave
W Ramsey Ave
S 5th St
S Indiana Ave
S 2nd St
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
E Bolivar Ave
5th 794
1
ay 1
S 6th St
ghw
e Hi
S Ellen St
S Clement Ave
S Brust Ave
S Brust Ave
S 1st Pl
S Logan Ave
S Pine Ave
E Howard Ave
S 3rd St
S 10th St
W Denis Ave
W Denis Ave
W Parnell Ave
W Mallory Ave
E St Francis Ave
E Norwich Ave
S Lenox St S Lenox
St
S Griffin Ave
S Austin St
S 5th Pl
W Armour Ave W Armour Ave
S Taylor Ave
S 9th St
S 10th St
State Highway 38
S 9th Pl
S 11th St
S 8th St
S 1st Pl
E Plainfield Ave
W Allerton Ave
S 14th St
S 13th St
S 18th St
S 16th St
I-94
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
S Burrell St
S 3rd St
S 8th St
S 10th St
S 12th St
S 12th St
S 14th St
S 15th St
S 21st St
S 22nd Pl
W Halsey Ave
S 20th St
S 29th St
S Howell Ave
S 5th St
S 7th St
S 5th Pl
S 8th St
ke
Av
e S 11th St
S 14th St
ind
la
S 15th St W
S 17th St
S 19th St
S 20th Pl
S 25th St
S 23rd St
S 15th St
S 16th St
S 18th St
S 18th St
S 22nd St
S 24th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S Point Ter
S 31st St
ST
uck
aw
ay
Dr
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 25th St
S Mar
ilyn S
t
S 1st St
S 12th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 17th St
S 26th St
S 28th St
S 29th St
S 30th St
S 32nd St
Ln
Somers
et
E Waterford Ave
Su
pe
rio
ab
rS
be
t
tt A
ve
E Car ol St
E Layton Ave
W Vogel Ave
S 33rd St
S 3rd St
S 21st St
S 24th St
S Layton Blvd
S 30th St
S 32nd St
S 34th St
S 33rd St
S 34th St
S 34th
St
S 33rd St
ay
3
S 4th St
S 10th St
Co
Mu
m
s
sk
eg tock S 19th St
oA
Av
e
S 17th St ve
S 28th St
S 31st St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 37th St
gh
w
Hi
S 36th St
S 35th St
S 40th St
N Farwell Ave
N 21st St
N 20th St
N 24th St
N 23rd St
N 26th St
N 24th Pl
N 25th St
N 27th St
N 28th Pl
N 37th St
N 35th St
N 34th St
N 32nd St
N 31st St
N 38th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
Sta
te
S 39th S
t
S 37th St
S 40th St
N 11th St
Ln
9th
N
N 9th St
N 9th St N 9th St
N 8th St
Access Rd
N 7th St
N James Lovell St N 7th St
N 6th St
St
6th
N
N 6th St
N Port Washington Rd
S 6th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N Mohawk Ave
N 4th St
N 4th St
N Navajo Ave
N 3rd St
N Dr Martin Luther King Dr
N Lydell Ave
N
N 2nd St
N Bay Ridge Ave
R
N
1st
St
St
1st
N
S 2nd St
iv
St
N
Lydell
N
1st
St
N 1st St
N Kent Ave
er
N Achilles St
ce
N Shoreland Ave
N Palmer St
N Hubbard St
nt
er
N Richards St
N Berkeley Blvd
D
N Buffum St
r
N Diversey Blvd
N Holton St
N Booth St
N Jackson St
N Idlewild Ave
N Pierce St
N Fratney St
N Cass St
N Bremen St
N Astor St
N Weil St
N Har
N Marlborough Dr
N Humboldt Blvd
bor D
r
NL
inc
N Ardmore Ave
oln
N Woodburn St
Me
mo
ria
N Larkin St
lD
N Cambridge Ave
r
N
Pr
os
N Bartlett Ave
pe
N Oakland Ave
ct
Av
N Cramer St
e
N Murray Ave
N 24th St
N Glen Park Rd
N Baker Rd
N Flint Rd
N Bethmauer Ln
N 25th St
N 30th St
N 36th St
N 34th St
N 32nd St
N 31st St
N 30th St
N 29th St
N 28th St
N 37th St
N 39th St
N 38th St
N 39th St
N 37th Pl
N Lite Ln
S 40th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
S 37th St
S 40th St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 40th St
S 44th St
S 46th St
N River Rd
ide
NW
ay
s
N Crestwood Dr
N Braeburn Ln
N Bethmaur Ln
N Seville Ave
N 29th St
N 27th St
N 32nd St
N 31st St
N 36th St
N 33rd St
N 39th St
N 40th St
N 41st St
Miller Park Way
S 44th St
S 42nd St
S 45th St
S 43rd St
S 46th St
S 47th St
S 48th St
46th St
S 45th St
S 45th St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
Squire D
r
N Birc
Ci r
NP
ine
hu
rs t
N San Marino Dr
Stratford Pl
N Dean Ct
N Range Line Rd
N 42nd Pl
N Sherman Blvd
N Grant Blvd
N 44th St
S 47th St
S 49th St
S 50th St S 50th St
S 52nd St
Mulberry Dr
N Northwood Ln
Lake Shore Dr
Willow Glen Ct
I-43
N Spruce Rd
N Valley Hill Rd
Upper River Ct
NP
elic
an
L
N 35th St
N 37th St
N 34th St N 34th St
N 36th St
N 38th St
N 39th St
N 40th St
N 40th St
N 42nd Pl
N Sherman Blvd
N 42nd St
N 44th St
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 47th St
N 50th Pl N 50th Pl
N
Alo
is
St
S 51st St
S 52nd St
S 51st St
S 55th St
S 53rd St
S 52nd St
y
Eas
twa
Lakewoo
dD
Oriole Ln
N Oriole Ln
lac L
Charter M
al
Grasslyn Rd
Valley Hill Dr
N Upper River Rd
N River Bend Ct
er Ct
N Kilde
N 41st St
N 40th St
N 40th St
N 42nd St
N 41st St
N 44th St
N 46th St
N 48th St
N 48th St
N 50th St
N 51st St
S 53rd St
S 54th St
S 57th St
S 57th St
Dr
Service Rd
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 45th St
N 47th St
N 49th St
N 48th St
N 50th St
N 50th St
N 52nd St
N 53rd St
S 56th St
S 58th St
S 59th St
S 60th St
Dr
field
S 7th St
N Link Pl
N 51st Blvd
N 52nd St
N 52nd St
N 51st Blvd
N 53rd St
N 54th St
N 55th St
N 54th St
N 55th St
N 54th St
N 57th St
N 58th St
N Haw
ley Rd
Rd
S 51st St
S 64th St
S 62nd St
Man
s
Broad St
N Range Line Rd
Gazebo Hill Pky
N 49th St
N 47th St
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 44th St
N 51st St
N 53rd St
N Highview Dr
St
N5
3 rd
N Presidio Dr
N 54th St
N 56th St
N 55th St
N 56th St
N 57th St
N 60th St
N 59th St
N 59th St
N 60th St
rd S
t
S 63
S 65th
St
S 67th St
S 68th St
S 69th St
S 72nd St
N Li
Riverland Rd
Justin Dr
N Canterbury Dr
N River Rd
N Countr
N Arbon Dr
N 55th St
N 55th St
N 57th St
N 59th St
N 58th St
N 58th St
N 58th St
N 57th St
N 58th Blvd
N 61st St
N 61st St
N 62nd St
S 62nd St
S 66th St
S 69th St
S 67th St
S 69th St
S 64th St
S 65th St
S 66th St
S 66th St
S 65th St
W P S 63rd St
ark R
S 62nd St
d
S 61st St
S 67th Pl
Pl
S 71st St
S 72nd St
N Fieldwood Rd
N Madero Dr
r Austin Ave
N Riebs Ln
N 59th St
N 62nd St
N 60th St
N 60th St
N 62nd St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 63rd St
Washington
C
S 68th St
S 70th St
S 71st St
St
ut
h
S 74th St
S 79th St
N Le Mont Blvd
Baehr Rd
N Bethanne Dr
ura L
n
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 65th St
N 65th St
N 66th St
N 68th St
NS
hole
s Av
N 65th St N
e
Car
lton
P
l
N 63rd St
ir
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 75th St
S 75th St
S 77th St
S 80th St
y View D
N Eastgate Dr
S Main St
S Orchard St
Industrial Dr
S Ha
wley
N 75th St
S 76th St
S 79th St
S 81st St
S 82nd St
S 82nd St
S 81st St
S 84th St
N 67th St
St
N7
4th
Ex
We eter St
stw
ay
Apri
cot C
t
Azale
a Ct
S 92nd St
N 64th St
N 66th St
N 69th St
N 70th St
N Lefeber Ave
N 72nd St
N 71st St
N 70th St
N 69th St
N 74th St
N 77th St
N 77th St
S 77th St
S 77th St
S 82nd St
S 88th St
N 67th St
N 71st St
N 75th St
State Highway 181
N 78th St
N 79th St
N 80th St
Day Ct
ey Cre
ek Pky
N 79th St
N Hon
S 83rd St
S 83rd St
S 77th St
S 90th St
S 93rd St
S 92nd St
W
Bu
rd
ick
Av
e
S 94th St
S 91st Pl
S 101st St
S 93rd St
S 97th St
S 96th St
ie L
n
S 107th St
S 106th St
S 104th St
SB
onn
S 110th St
N 67th St
N 69th St
N 72nd St
N 80th St
N 81st St
Elm Spri
n
g Ave
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 98th St
S 100th St
S 103rd St
S 104th St
S 86th St
S 91st St
S 94th St
S 93rd St
S 99th St
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 102nd St
S 105th St
S 107th St
Oakbrook Dr
State Highway 100
S 112th St
N Buntrock Ave
N Enterprise Dr
N Ma
N 68th St
N 72nd St
N Swallow Ln
N 76th Pl
N 77th St
N 80th St
N 82nd St
N 82nd St
N 84th St
N 86th St
S 89th St
S 90th St
S 91st St
S 94th Pl
S 93rd St
S 80th St
N Swan Blvd
N 95th St
S 97th St
S 96th St
N 74th S
t
N 84th St
N 82nd St
N 83rd St
N 86th St
N 88th St
N 88th St
N 91st St
N 93rd St
N 95th St
r
Rd
Ac
ce
ss
I-894
S 100th St
N 73rd St
N 80th St
N 78th
St
81
st
St
N 86th St
N 87th St
N 90th St
N 89th St
N 87th
St
N 91st St
N 90th St
N 91st St
N 89th St
N 93rd St
N 94th St
N 97th Pl
Co
lo
ni
al
D
N
N 102nd St
S 109th St
S 111th St
S 110th St
S 115th St
N 66th St
Av
e
Jo
y
N Faulkner Rd
E
N 93rd St
N 95th St
N 97th St
EK
RE
N Kn
oll Blv
d
N 105th St
N Mayfair Rd
N 110th Pl
S 112th St
S 112th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
Lake Shore Dr
d
Gre
en B
ay R
w Ct
W Rid
gevie
r
water D
N Bridge
Solar Ave
N Silver Ave
Vega Ave
N Swan Rd
N 95th St
TL
LIT
Dr
anor
N Pa
rk M
N 99th St
N 103rd St
N 101st St
N 100th St
N 105th St
N 108th St
N 106th St
C
N 99th St
N 111th St
N 112th St
S 114th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
S 118th
St
S 122nd St
N 86th S
t
St
N 96th
N 99th St
N 104th St
N 102nd St
N 106th St
N 112th St
S 116th St
S 117th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S Nicolet Dr
hwoo
Riverland Rd
Cedarburg Rd
Hillside Dr
N Windsor Ct
RIV
ER
Dr
Concord Dr
N 107th St
N 109th St
N 110th St
United States Highway 45

N 119th St
N 113th St
N 115th St
N 124th St
Longwood Ave
S 128th St
S 127th St
S 130th St
Dr
N 89th St
t
hS
N 115th St
N 116th St
N Lovers Lane Rd
N 118th St
N 117th S
t
N Park Dr
Sheraton Rd
SW
ilso
nD
S Elm Grove Rd
S 132nd St
poin
te
High
Loftus Ln
Ash Ct
S Sunnyslope Rd
Foxk
irk
ce
EE
CR
Alquran Ct
N1
15
T
N 119th St
N 119th St
N 124th St
N 126th St
Burlawn Pky
Mayfair Dr
N 131st St
N 122nd St
Old Lantern Dr
N Fiebrantz Dr
Parkside Dr
S 134th St
S Meadowmere Pky
S Li
lac L
n
S Glen Par
k Rd
Forest Ave
W Holmes Ave
W Norwich St
W Martin Ln
S 7th St
S Small Rd
Wauwatosa Rd
Pioneer Dr
M EN O M O
NE
E
N Granville Rd
RK
PA
A
N 124th St
r
Park Dr
N 125th St
N 128th St
N 127th St
N 135th St
N 134th St
BUTLER
S Sunny Slope Rd
t Ct
Silver M
is
S Fairlane Ave
S Brookland Rd
t
S 145th St
7th
S
S 14
S Manor Dr
Av
e
at
io
na
l
N
W
N Farmdale Rd
LIT TLE
Dr
N Council Hills
124th St
TZK
DRE
N 124th St
Highland Dr Flint Dr
Parkwa
yD
Marach Rd
Campbell Dr
CH
DIT
Stone Dr
N 144th St
S Wildwoo
S Ronke Ct
N Briarhill Rd
CREEK
N Granville Rd
ON E
E
OM
MEN
Wasaukee Rd
Wasaukee Rd
NE
L
AN
Dr
iew
Pa
rkv
r
Claas Rd
Oakwood Dr
CREEK
Lilly Rd
Oak Ln
LY
LIL
Dolphin Dr
Highland Dr
Vist
aV
iew
d Dr
Dr
Ter
way
Gre
en
S James Dr
S Moorland Rd
S 159th St
S Town Road
S Casper Dr
Melville
D
Northwood Dr
Ash Dr
r
D
N 149th St
N 148th St
N 147th St
Lone Tree Rd
Woodland Ave
Pilgrim Pky
N Moorland Rd
Service Dr
S 170th St
S 171st St
DOUSM AN DIT CH
Melody Ln
od Dr
S Executive Dr
S 164th St S Post Rd
S Forest Ln
S 167th St
S 169th St
S 171st St
S West Ln
S 179 St
Lilly Rd
Dr
Sylvan Ln
Northpoint
Woodview Dr
M
in
eo
la
eL
n
Cullen Dr
t
Patrick Blvd
S Michael Dr
San Juan Trl

Sauk Trl
Bradee Rd
Churchview Dr
Spring Dr Alverno Dr
Indianw
o
Hillsdale Dr
Mierow Ln
Cla
re B
ridg
N 167th St
Sm
ith C
Woelfel Rd
Talon Trl
Badge
rD
N 161st St
N 159th St
N 158th St
N 162nd St
N 160th St
Greenview Ave
Penn Ct
N Calhoun Rd
N 169th St
N 166th St
Le Ch
a
Norhardt Dr
teau
Dr
Coach H
Fiserv Dr
CH
Fond du Lac Ave
Amber Dr
N OR-XWAY
Henry Stark Rd
Franklin Dr
Honey Ln
Ox
for
dS
t
Norman Dr
Ln
Elm
Countryside Dr
Pheasant Ln
Pilgrim Rd
Shady Ln
Oak Ridg
e
Evelyn Ter
Lincrest Dr
r
sau
D
Nas
ouse Dr
S Calhoun Rd
S Acredale Rd
Marcy Rd
Imperial Dr
Shasta Dr
Bexley Dr
Tilton Ln
d
R
River Dr
Preserve Pky
Pilgrim Rd
Neptune Dr
Colonial Dr
Water St
Arthur Ave
Mary Ct
Allen Ave
Robert Ave
Wildwood Dr
Wilson
Dr
Town Hall Rd
Dr
Jac
k
son
Trl
S Delphine Dr
W Barnard Ave
W Tripoli Ave
S Pennsylvania Ave
W Bottsford Ave
E Wilbur Ave
S Arctic Ave
W Bolivar Ave
E Holt Ave
E Morgan Ave
S Herman St
W Water ford Ave

W Plainfield Ave
E Ohio Ave
W Saveland Ave
S 9th St
Rd
E Euclid Ave
W Holt Ave
W Howard Ave
E Idaho St
E Gauer Cir
E Oklahoma Ave
S 7th St
S Andrae Dr
Squire Dr
Held Dr
Joper
R
Bancroft Dr
Pre
mie
r Ln
To
we
rR
d
Marcy Rd
Clover Ln
N Brookfield Rd
Elizabeth Ct
N Janacek Rd
Eg
an
S Stigler Rd
W Holt Ave
ve
ve
Ave ell A
ter
s
rA
t
t
s
o
u
yo n S
r
R
EP
P
E
E
Iro
E
E Montana St
E Dakota St
S 5th St
S Woefel Rd
W Colony Dr
Dr
SW
illia
ms
W Montana St
E Homer St
Dr
W Cleveland Ave
St
S Brennan Dr
W Harrison Ave
W Hayes Ave
ve
cA
nni
icki
inn
Ave
SK
eld
ayfi
SD t
S
llen
SE
W Arthur Ave
W Arthur Ave
St
E Stewart
E Bay St
St
d
ar
E Lincoln Ave
W
E
E Linus St
e
or
Sh
olli
ng
D
tH
es W Grant St
r
Fo
S 21st St
S Racine Ave
W Historic Mitchell St
es St
y Ln
W Lapham St
E Jon
y St
SR
W Elgin Ln
W Madison St
W Greenfield Ave
S 4th St
S Cari Ada
m Dr
E Chicago St
S Ba
oun
tr
#
*
#
*
Dr
SC
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
W St Paul Ave
ve
eA
om W Becher St
W Holt Ave
reek
S 200th St
S 199th St
t
ill S
Rd
Park
S Johnson Rd
N 132nd St N 132nd St
Western Ave
Dr
Nigbor
Orchard Dr
Maple Rd
N Willow Ln
One Mile Rd
Derrin Ln
Poplar Creek Dr
Catskill Rd
S Barker Rd
H
ory
WT
r
arbo
SH
Dr
S Danny Rd
E Wells St
W Kilbourn Ave
th
14
S Swartz Rd
Forest Dr
Kurt Dr
yne
D
Bisc
a
Division Rd
Wagon Trl
Fawn Ln
Woodside Ln
Well
ingto
n Dr
Lannon Rd
N Lannon Rd
N Barker Rd
Knollwood Dr
R
VE
RI
EE
ON
Stonewood Dr
Hi
St
at
e
Rd
La
nn
on
Lannon Rd
Town Line Rd
Catherine Ct
Martha Ln
Jaclyn Dr
t
E State S
4
I-79
Sunnycrest Dr
St
Park Fwy E Knapp
Ct
S Shady Ln
W Vine St
rferry
S Ca
Copenhill Rd
E North Ave
E
E Garfield Ave
W
oo
E Lloyd St
ds
t
S
toc
E Brown St
e
E Kane Pl
c
kP
r
e
l
m
m
St
E Hamilton
Co
N
E Brady St
S 5th
S Amor Dr
e
W Gar field Av
N Marshall St
Pioneer Trl
E Meinecke Ave
p
Ra m
S Springdale Rd
E Wright St
S Valley Ln
E Park Pl
Pl
iew
Bellev
E
E Webster Pl
I- 43
W Ohio Ave
ney C
S Ho
Ter
S Edinbourgh Dr
N Gordon Pl
Springdale Rd
Pl
rn
bu
E Linnwood Ave
W Clarke St
W Wells St
E Capitol Dr
St
rie
EE
t
rS
ate
SW
Dr
er
Sh
Rd
E Jarvis St
E Locust St
Access Rd
Cherokee
E Olive St
E Kenwood Blvd
E Chambers St
ren St
N Van Bu
Ch
ea
ne
y
N Morris Blvd
vd
E Lake Bluff Bl
E Hartford Ave
W Burleigh St
t
N Water S
N Plankinton Ave
Misty Ln
E Glendale Ave
E Kensington Blvd
W Ring St
St
Ava
lo
Ram n Dr
ona
Rd
xe
Pky
rd
Elmwood Dr
elu
WD
lya
Ha
Whitehall St
E Henry Clay St
Es
tab E Hampton Ave
roo
kP
ky
W Brown St
W Hayes Ave
S 36th St
ook
Guthrie Dr
E Circle Dr
y3
wa
gh
Hi
e
at
St
Rd
es
ad N Newhall St
Dr
E Birch Ave
Ln
E Silver Spring Dr
Foxcroft Ln
Mary Buth Ln
County Highway G
Lan
cel
ot D
River Ln
OM
EN
M
gh
w
ay
16
7
Hilltop Dr
r
ies
D
Dav
Dr
Villag
e
Lynwood Dr
E Lake View Ave
lis
Pa
view
E Day Ave
We
st
E Belle Ave
oo
d
School Rd
nD
ilso
NW
Fo
xw
E Acacia Rd
S 15th Pl
Ct
N Fox Hollow Rd
Scott Ln
McCormick Dr
Merkel Dr
Shadow Wood Dr
Fox Ln
Ln
Sp
ri n
gh
ill
Ln
Oa
k
Whitehorse Dr
Town Line Rd
Elmwood Rd
Pleasant View Dr
Maple Rd
Robinhood Dr
Goldendale Rd
N Town Line Rd
Amy Belle Rd
Amy Belle Ln
Tamarack Rd
F
Longv riess Pl
iew R
d
Sussex Rd
Rd
gacre
N Lon
d
rd y R
mba
N Lo
Ln
Ln
E Daisy Ln
St
Ave
d Rd
irchil
EW
ye
W Locust St
N 15th St
No
rth
E Hyde Way
SOUTH MEN OMON EE

W Florida St
MN-19 CAN AL
W Bruce St
BURN HAM
E National Ave
CAN AL
S 23rd St
Concord
ir
1 Miles
N Park Rd
Wilhar Rd
N Fa
Rd
Tre
e
N Club
0.5
N Ironwood Rd
Lon
e
E Good
rich Ln
E Bradley Rd
n
E Fox L
ns
ki
op
E Keefe Ave
Westwood
D
E Willow R
W Abert Pl
S 45th St
Jennifer Ln
Dr
E Dean Rd
W Dean Rd
let Rd
n Nico
N Jea
N Ironwood Ln
St
St
Butler Dr
N Davis Rd
Country Aire Dr
Rocky Ln
Shadow Ln
S Mayfield Rd
Colgate Rd
Colgate Rd
Rd
E Buttles Pl
W Galena St
W Galena St
W Cherry St
W Vliet St
W Vliet St
W Cold Spring Rd
S 49th St
Milky Way Rd
N Point
W Berg
e n Dr
ss
Acce
N 19th Pl
State Highway 74
Ln
t
th S
N Pelham Pky
r
no
Ma
N Iroquois Rd
Ln
N 19
ns
ki
op
State Highway 164
D
ke
La
ant
E Ellsworth Ln
ton A
ve
W Mineral St
W Tripoli Ave
Ln
sex
Sus
Po
int
W Melvina St
W Clarke St
D
ver Pky way
W Kinnickinnic Ri
rk
a
P
r
enb
Gre
Dr
W Abbott Ave
amp
W Canal St
W Rogers St
W Edgerton Ave
land Dr
r
N Court
ia D
o
equ
NS
s
hea
NP
N 18th St
N 19th Pl
N 21st St
Gree
nbria
rR
Dr
l
il P
ve
rA
WH
oe
S 44th St
Dr
Dr
EB
ay
E Chateau Pl
W Orchard St
W Burnham St
W Tesch Ave
Fair
E Dong
e s Rd
Fairy Chasm Rd
W Fairy Chasm Rd E Good
W Columbia St
t
sS
W Pierce St
W Scott St
W Van Beck Ave
Rd
W Fiebrantz Ave W Fiebrantz Ave

Access Rd
Pl
th Pl
Fairly Poor
E Ravine Baye
E Fairmount Ave
W Keefe Ave
r
on
Frederick St
Dr
okdale
Av
Rd gview
N Pierron
e
on
Av
NL
ra
rda
NA
Ne
te
ex
c
ar
on
#
*!
#
*
#
*"
!
(
"
)
(
)
"
)
an D
othm
S Str
S 50
D
nd
eve
er Ct
"
)
"
)
"
)
W Silver Spring Dr
W Birch A
ve
e D
e Av N
Gr
Excellent
iew D r
W Riverv
e
e Av
Sall
W la
W Lawn Ave
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
W Mount Vernon Ave
an Dr
Sherid
N Spruce Ln
resta
N Bro
N Greenview Dr
N la C
e Ci r
rgyl
NA
N 31st St
W Cherry St
Fair
Dr
W Glen River Rd
W Bender Rd
Av
e
W Meinecke Ave
W Garfield Ave
bo
nA
ve W Brown St
W
W Vine St
W Vine St
Sa
rno
w
St W Walnut St
W Galena St
t
N 50th S
Ca Downing Dr
va
lie
rD
Ln
r
D
olia
e Tre
Dr
N Pine Shore
l Dr
N Atwah
y Pl
W Chambers St
W Dakota St
N Shorecliff
stone Pl
N Haddon
agn
NM
N Pin
r
Shore D
N Neil Pl
N Glen
idne
NS
W Burleigh St
Ln
tr y Ln
N Coun
N Valley Dr
N Grasslyn Rd
ir
nia Ave N 32nd St
N Teuto
N 31st St
St
ins
pk
Ho
St
W
al
t re
on
M
N 48th St
N Hi Mount Blvd
lin
g
y
Pk
Ln
an C
N De
N 38th Pl
t
ns S
opki
N 49th St
S 54th St
lighter
N 37th St
N 38th St
urg Rd
N Cedarb
NH
N 53rd St
G
ra
n
ela
St James Ln
Bobolink Ln
N Lamp
d
Fairfield R
Ct
N Deerwood Dr N 43rd St
side
adow
N Me
N 50th St
N 51st St
Northway
Lake Shore Dr
N Colony D r
or
Sh
Mulberry Dr
N Fairway Ln
Service Rd
id
ac
Pl
y
rle
Mo
Greenway
W Concordia Ave
EK
W Leroy Ave
W Park
W Hope Ave
W Nash St
W Montana St
W Armour Ave
el Ave
W Vog
dD
elan
N River Rd
5
ay
X
W
W
X
ar
ne
Poor
E Junip
lyn
Invertebrates
od
E Juniper Ln
Wo
W Courtland Ave
St
W
W Glendale Ave
At
kin
so
Ave
n A W Ruby
ve
W Cornell St
W Congress St
velt Dr
W Roose
W Olive St
W Vienna Ave
eld Ave
W Plainfi
ay
Dr
S 56th St
iew
W
X
Very Poor
Source: MMSD, USGS, WDNR, Wisconsin Lutheran College,

Inter-Fluve, Inc., and SEWRPC.
W Lancaster Ave
W Auer Ave
W
X
W Norwich Ave
Churchw
nd
v
W
X
la
Mid
W Grange Ave
Gr
a
24
e
at
St
W Leroy Ave
W Allerton Ave
S 61st St
e n Ct
W Gard
gh
y
wa
S 66th St
Westlake Dr
Pky
W Oklahoma Ave
rial Cir
e Rd
land D
S 78th St
W Ridg
W Mid
W
X
Hi
W Ruby Ave
ve
cA
ctri
e
l
E
W Stack Dr
St
ve
ham A
W Up
tz Rd
S Kur
Balboa Dr
S 113th St
Ln
Nicolet Dr
W Parnell Ave
W Godsell Rd
en
2nd
S8
g
in
re
Ln
od
wo
llen S 98th St
SA
rk
wla
S
11th
S1
r
Sp
Lis
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
NOTE: See Table 1A for total length of

streambank and streambed assessed
for stability. Those segments are also
32 SEWRPC TR No. 39.
Highway
shownState
on Map
37 in
W Villard Ave
W Cameron Ave
W Glendale Ave
W Hadley St
Habitat
W Fairfield Ct
W Bender Rd
rth Point Rd
E Ravine Dr
W Acacia Rd
WP
urd
ue
St
S Impe
S 111th St
W Layton Ave
W Dosie Ave
W Carpenter Ave
W
X
W Elm St
W Kiehnau Ave
W Concordia Ave
Rd
W Hemlock
NA (Not Applicable For

Quality Rating Due To
Sampling Gear)
E No
Dr
W MillerGood
W Larkspur Ln
W Heather Ln
W Woodbury Ln
e St
eyenn
W
W Hayes Ave
Fil
lm
W Rita Dr
ore
W
Dr
Je
re
lyn
Pl
W Cleveland Ave
e
Av
W Chapman Ave
obi
le
n
ar L
Ce d
Very Poor
Poor
Fair
Good
No Fish
W Zedler Ln
W el Rancho Dr
dar Ln
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
Trillium Rd
Aster Ln
W Dean Rd
W Keefe Ave
W Townsend St
W Mitchell St
S 61st St
n
rto
le
l
A
W Grant St
W Whitaker Ave
W Bottsford Ave
WM
EE
S 81st St
t
S 99th S
S 88th St
t
th S
W Waterford Ave
l
rP
e
ch
Be
CR
S 99
St
2nd
Dr
W Waterford Ave
W
X
S Sunset Dr
S 10
e
shir
W Waterford Sq
eek
D
ve
sA
sett
chu
W Wilbur Ave
W Crawford Ave
a
ass
W Warnimont Ave
W Eden Pl
S
OD
W Madison St
W Lakefield Dr
y Cr
E
CR
W Washington St
SM
W Morgan Ave
Dr
hw
Hi g
Dr
W Holt Ave
Rd
tory
NS
WO
W Washington St
W Ce
W Kiley St
W Ch
W Dixon St
W Adler St
Pl
ke
Dy
St
an S 75th
SV
n
tto
ra
St
W Ohio Ave
N 54th St
t
ey S
W Bennett Ave
W
W Euclid Ave Hone
MN-18
W Park Hill Ave
W Fiesta Ln
W Kenboern Dr
S 61st St
S 78th St
Y
NE
MN-16
Pl
W Fairview Ave
W Madison St
W#
X
*
N 54th Blvd
earn
WK
HO
Dr
S 89th St
iver
S 122nd St eado
SM
M
ll D
no
yk
ar
S Frances Av
S la Salle Dr
S Greentree Dr
Dr
Pky
d
ar
en
rtland
let Dr
S Nico
S Cou
Rd
W Becher St
e
W Harrison Av
W Cleveland Ave
W Montana Ave
S 93rd St
S 101st St
St
2nd
S 10
St
04th
S1
St
S 106th
R
er
SR
WP
allo
tine
t
loi
Be
5
14
S 85th St
S 87th St
S 106th St
S 95th St
S 103rd St
S 104th St
St
ollm
SW
Dr
W Woodside Dr
Be
rl i
n
W Harding Pl
60th St
S 105th
Rd
W Maple St
N 57th St
W Mount Vernon Ave
W Main St
W Dickinson St
W McMyron St
W Walker St
W Arthur Pl
enton
Fish
Mequon Rd
W Mc Kinley Blvd
Concrete lined channel
W Juneau Ave
from river miles
Dr 3.62 to 4.24
tin
r
W Highland Ave
W Highland Blvd
a
M
W State St
W
W Wisconsin Ave
N 68th St
vice
Ser
N
a
ion
at
l
sP
aye
#
*
Wellauer Dr
Pl
l
tP
y
o
D
elt
ev
s
oo
W Vine St
W Tr
Cedar St
W Wells St
W Stevenson St
W Dixon S
O Connor St
D
on
#
#
*
*
!
(
(
#
*!
Martin Dr
W Chestnut St
Rive
r Pk
y
Maple Ter
N 76th St
N 91st St
N 93rd St
h St
N 95t
St
N 98th St
N 107th
Pl
N 104th St
N 108th
XX
W
W
W
X
W
X
t
ing
ash
aW
W
#
*X
St
W Washington Blvd
St Jam Vista Ave

es St
Range Line Ter
W Rochelle Ave
W Fiebrantz Ave
W Meinecke Ave
W Garfield Ave
W Lloyd St
W Hope Ave
W Wright St
W North Ave
Yale Pl
Milwauke
e Ave
yA
ve
Eroding
W Ranch Rd
W Hemlock St
W Tupelo St
W Fairmount Ave
W Chambers St
rth
Ma
!
(
"
)
W
X
XW
W
W Chester St
W Adler St
W Moltke Ave
)
"
)"
Portland Ave
Avon Ct
N 73rd St
ve
dA
oo
ay
Access Rd
N Wauwatosa Ave
Ave
Church St Dewey
ing Blv
t
0th S
Rd
hw
ig
W
Stickney Ave
Rogers Ave
W Woodland Ave
Hillcrest Dr
MN-17A
W Melvina
ilip
Ph
W Glen Oaks Ln
Woodside
Ln
W Bradley Rd
W Congress St W Congress St
W Capitol Pky
W Thrush Ln
W Edward Dr
W Calumet Rd
W Custer Ave
rk wa
y Dr
W Hope Ave
W Keefe Ave Pky
W Center St
Jackson Par k Blvd
W Pa
W Marion St
v
na A
Vien
Livingston Ave
W Meinecke Ave
ge
ita
m
Ar
W River Oaks Ln
W Club View Dr
ay
W Monrovia W
W Florist Ave
N Hard
N 10
W Clarke St
ns
e
Av
W Fairy Chasm Rd
W Douglas Ave
e
Av
Dorothy Pl
nd
D
W Sunnydale Ln
W Woolworth Ave
e
at
St
W Lorraine Pl
N 72nd St
N 87th St
ky
rP
ive
W Auer Ave
N River Trail Rd
r
e
Te
Av
on
rd
Le
fo
ed
M
W Nash St
Co
e
nc
ta
W Ruby Ave
N 75th St
W Vienna Ave
W Concordia Ave
W Schlinger Ave
Dr
Ci
r
a
os
nt
W Sheridan Ave
W Birch Ave
ve
rt A
N 74th St
1
y4
wa
gh
Hi
t
e
N 78th S
es
Av
t
ett Sta
ck ed
N 80th St
Be Unit
e
Av
W
ton
us
Ho
te
ll St
Conne
ve
lA
te
Sta
ra
Ki
le
N 55th Pl
Av
e
W Villard Ave
rw
Ha
WH
Dr
W Keefe Ave
oo
dP
ky
at
e
N 67th St
ed
fo
r
R
ee
on
Un
de
rw
CREEK
e
Av
Co
lga
N Pearlette Ln
N 70th St
N Servite Dr
e
Av
N 86th St
N 86th Pl
Av
e
N 92nd St
m
no
Me
W
X
W Arthur Ave
W Edgerton Ave
Ne
w
Ridge Blvd
W Hayes Ave
ve
aA
tan
W Chapman Ave
bo
n
#
*
!
(
"
)
W Lincoln Ave
St
y
lle
Va
Lis
N 97th St
Te
r
ac
m
to
Po
N 98th St
S
ay
W Becher St
7th
S 11
n
Su
Pl
Sth
1
e
Av
e
tto
rb
e
e
lm
H
W Stark St
Pa
W
W
W Hampton Ave
State Highway 190
W Manitoba St
th St
er
at
Pl
l
den P
W Lawrence Ave
I-94
A St
St
Blvd
t
r Ridge
st S
S Rive
121
S 121st St S
W Cold Spring Rd
Sunburs
t Ln W Bobwood Rd
W Ar
W Douglas Ave
W Thurston Ave
W Thurston Cir
Access Rd
e
W Sheridan Av
w
len
N 113th St
d
n
Mo
S 119
nd
22
S1
W Scarborough Dr
W Linfield Dr
N 84th St
St
Ct
NG
ky
Rd
rP
a
ve
sh
Ri
ke
au
W
a Cir
W Florist Ave
Kenyon Ave
W Rogers St
ot
Ro
S Victori
Douglas Ave
Isl
a
er F
ore
st D
r
W Liebau Rd
W Parkland Ave
W Spring Ln
Drop Structure
Dam
Aggrading
Degrading
Stable
Bedrock
Concrete
Enclosed Channel
W Woodale Ave
W Green Tree Rd
W Brentwood Ave
W Hicks St
y
bl
S Pohl Dr
em
W
N 94th St
N 103rd St
N 108th
00
ay 1
N 116th St
s
S Alfred St
W Wilbur Dr
e
Av
W Donna Dr
W Dean Rd
W Mill Rd
W Hawthorne Ave
W Morgan Ave
W Eden Trl
Kn
oll
W Mitchell St
Ave
W Ohio Dr
W Crawford Dr
e
Av
e
Av
ighw
N 116th St
N 120th St
ti
ur
C
CH
S
K
AN
EE
BR
TH
CR
SO U
OD
ERW O
UN D
clid
W Eu
N 85th
c
La
on
et
pl
Ap
te H
Sta
N 118th St
N 122nd St
Dr
re Dr
ointe
W Maylo
ieldp
F
W
nk
rba
Bu
du
St
N 120th St
eR
Kenmar Rd
W Cleveland Ave
W Dakota St
Rd
W Clovernook St
NI
ndu
Li strial
m
Rd
a
St
W Schroeder Dr
W Wahner Ave
ange
Ave
W Boehlke Ave
W Acacia St
Ln
W Ravine
Dr
W Deer Run
W Joleno Ln
St
W Hustis
W Denver Ave
W Custer Ave
W Innov
ation Dr
W Potter Rd
W Wells St
W Hayes Ave
Rd
e
Av
ch
Bir
W Lapham St
#
*
oon
sn
o
Po
rt
Av
e
Service Rd
W Radcliffe Dr
St
Ave
rch
WA
W Hiawatha Dr
W Good Hope Rd
nd
Fo
St
N 115th
th St
rov
Lag
Fr
e
g
ag
Fl
Pr
iv
W
WX
XX
W
N Rockway Ct N 86th St
N 114th
e
Av
N 119
Blvd
EE
G
Elm
ll D
N 87th St
Pl
on
et
pl
Ap
N Arbor D
e
Blue Ridg
CR
s
op
sh
Bi
Hi
W Lilac Ln
By
ro
n
"
)
W Walker St
Dr
Park
W Honey Ln
W Park Ave
Ave
rk
Pa
N River Trail Dr
N 129th St
Ln
n
Park L
er
nk
Bu
W Meadow Ln
W Prospect Dr
W Forest Dr
W Ferguson Rd
Paddock Pky
W Montana Ave
SA
W
X
X
WW
X
#
*
W
X
bor
nA
ve
James St
WR
W Darnel Ave
W Calumet Rd
W Lynx Ave
W Ruby Ave
Pky
her
Fis
PARK
sS
t
W Hadley St
W Bluemound
ear
yce
St
N 124th St
N 131st St
ock
#
*
!
(
"
)
d
oo
y
Pk
N Jo
n
An
N 111th St
Rd N
5
14
le
vil
an
ad
oD
lyh
Hol
OO
Tru Ln
RW
c
Kis
W Grange Ave
e rw
nd
WD
alla
ul Av
e
W
X
#
*
!
(
W
X
Dr
rw
ea
Cl
TO
N
RA
elen
aC
Donges Bay Rd
Le Grande Blvd
W Elmdale Rd
W Willow Rd
W Glenbrook Rd
Service Rd
Service Rd
W Clinton Ave
St
W Win
field A
v
arine
Dr
N Ivy
W Rohr Ave
W Watertown Plank Rd
Tulane St
W Graham St
l
al
Ave
Tremont St
W Honey Ln
e
Av
D
ge
rt id
es
W
S
Rd
all
m
S
W
Sm
Knoll Rd
Te
r
W Dixon St
W Forest Dr
Crimson Ln
W Howard Ave
Rd
Gr
Ro
Manor Hills Blvd
N Lilly Rd
t
un
Mo
W Kostner Ln
W Maple Ridge Rd
e
at
St
Ct
DE
W Prospect Pl
by
im
Qu
James St
W Crestview
r Ln
West Grove Ter
ber
t
W
X
MN-14A
W Mayflower Dr W Fenway Dr
unt
e
W Clarke St
Gil
MN-14
Myrtle Ave
W Beechwood Trl
W Beloit Rd
3
I-4
k Rd
Dr Dover Hill Ln
SH
W Beres Rd
!
(
Dr
W Rogers Dr
S 149th St
a Dr
Dr
ltop D
W Hil
UN
Virginia Ave
S Parkside Dr
k
ar
Dr
Golf Pky
R
ke
Dr
Rd
W Mount Vernon Ave
S 152nd St
ofs
Eg
Highland D
look
ee
n Plan
Watertow
W Hillcrest Dr
Ove
r
Ln
Tr
m
El
y Ln
E Rockwa
uer Dr
Kevena
Juneau Blvd
Madera
Ci
Cir
rc
le
Hackberry Ln
S 162nd St
llc
st
re
Sunnyview Ln
ills Dr
Dr
S Longview Dr
Hi
S Martin Rd
Ct
W Barton Rd
oss
W Salentine Dr
W Lawnsdale Rd
ivier
#
*
!
(
W Center St
W Ka
MN-17
Lee Ct Laurel
Ln
Wraybur n Rd
Dunwoody Dr
Gremoor Dr
Walnut Rd
Brook Ave
Nicolet Ave
rt Dr
Froedte
W Harcove Dr
W
Ln
nk
Chipmu
W
ary R
WM
Dr
WR
Dr
W Observatory Rd
Rd
"
)
d
k R W Cloverleaf Ln
W Marcia Rd
NO
YES
W Harvest Ln
W Townsend St
Elmhurst Pky
Victoria Cir
W San Mateo Dr
lm
SE
ta St
W Ryerson
Victor Rd
Ln
e
in
ac
W Coffee Rd
W Dako
"
)
#
*
(
!
#
*
!
(
Hi
lls
i
Rd
Robin
k
Oa
n
ill L
WH
WD
gg Av
W Fla
W Keefe Ave
de
Rd
Westover Rd
Woodlawn Cir
Dr
view
Wood
Brittany Dr
Ct
Club Dr
W Ridge Rd
W Rogers Dr
S 166th St
eh
W
d
rR
Verde Ln
Hidden H
arie Ct
Jean M
Kirby St
dg
e
Carpenter Rd
W Glendale Dr
ll
Mi
Rd
Burnet St
W Lincoln Ave
Ko
t
hl
le C
er
a
d
s
Ct
n
Rd
ale
Lawnsd
w
a
L
ll
Hi
Tremont St
Tansdale Rd
w
vie
Dr
Judith Ln
W Rogers Dr
W We
st Ln
Beeheim Rd
Brook Ln
Deerpark
Roosevelt Ave
S Heide
Patricia Ln
Quinn Rd
Golf Pky
St
Dr
Sunridge Dr
Ruby Ln
C
urst
W Norwood Dr
rs
ffe
Je
D
nd
dla
o
o
W
Crestview Dr
Lillian Rd
S Carriage Ln
W Pinecrest Ln
W Southview Ln
l Ln
d Hil
Fronta
ge Rd
Patti Ln
S Willow R
st
W
ay
W
X
Ct
Ri
Le
on
W Sheridan Ave
W Wirth St
Forestview Ln
W Dogwood St
W Daphne S
t
W Jon
en St
W Feerick St
Waynescott Rd
W Portage St
W Vera Ave
#
*
!
(
"
)
"
)
o
nbro
Gle
fD
ol
W Haven Ave
W Westfield Rd
W Donges Ln
WM
Dr
Freistadt Rd
W Kathleen Ln
Ave
ok
W Tower Ave
W Juniper St
W Peck Pl
Hope St
Lindsay Dr
W Bobolink Ave
W Colfax Pl
ts Dr
To
ve
rA
e
w
W Greenwood Ter
W Metro Bd
Ruby Ave
n St
W Darnell Ave
W Calumet Rd
MN-12
W Stark St
xD
se
s
E
br
o
X
W
W
X
Riv
Scenic Ave
W Pine Ln
W County Line Rd
W Fountain Ave
W Lake Park Dr
W Eggert Pl
#
*
#
*
!
(
Heigh
W Villa Ave
rne Ct
W Luce
W Lilly Ln
W Heather
e
Terra Av
"
)
#
*
!
(
#
*
!
(
"
)
#
*
W Ally
W Bradley Rd
"
)
Mill Rd
#
*
ily
an
nD
r
Kat Dr
aD
r
Ave
W Wisconsin
r
ood D
urt
W Co
y
Wa
orn e Ln
h
t
Bay ourn
b
Ash
Edmonton Ln
S Nor w
Dr
Pe
nh
ur
Evergree
n
Daylily Dr
Newell Dr
Hyland Dr
Ma
r
Br
oj
h
Pine
Stonehedge Dr
Davidson Rd
W Downie Rd
S Hanke Dr
ve
eA
tD
Sunse
Woodsid
e
Follett Dr
Foxkirk Dr
Ave
Ln
cin
Ra
Blackhawk Trl
rd
Wexfo
Rempe Dr
Jills Dr
Patricia Ln
Ranch Rd
Woodland Pl
Kin
g
XX
W
W
n
Brentwood Dr
Hampton Ave
W Lilly
W
X
Emerald Dr
urn
Aub
idge
E Broadway St
Hinsdale Rd
County Highway I
Wisconsin Ave
Briar Ridge Dr
r
Dr a Te
ll
Vi
Sultan St
Harris Dr
Mayer Ln
Luella
Dr
MN-13A
Goetz Dr
Pearl St
Ellis St
n
Lege
Harvest Ln
Ln
nie
Bon
k Dr
arac
Tam
Ct
W Burleigh Blvd
r
ia D
Mar
a
t
n
Sa
Pomona Rd
MN-13
Ter
Leon
on
ingt
Ben
Gebhardt Rd
ry D
ber
n
r
Tu
Dr
igan
Harr n Ct
le
Cul
!
(
#
*
!
(
"
)
Nicolet Ct
Fairmount Ave
Brookhill Dr
Vernon Dr
L
Siesta
Civic Dr
W Corporate Dr
Hi R
dale
D
Brian Dr
Dr
Ho
P
lly heas
an
Ln
tD
Cedar Dr
Gree
n
Warwick Dr
l Dr
Ln
hon
Bre
Surrey Ln
Tanala Dr
Black Forest Dr
Timberline Dr
R
d
8
1
y
wa Swenson
Dr
igh
State Highway 59
Dover Dr
y Ln
Brooklawn Dr
Pky
Alta Louise
ate
St
d
ite
Un
t
yC
ok
Bro
Hunters Run
Anoka Ave
164
Perkins Ave
Arcadian Ave
Dr
tha
Mar
Larkspur Dr
Ac
c
W Bluemound Rd ess
sH
W North Ave
Independence Dr
it
Summ
ay
State Highw
Coral Dr
Kodiak Trl
n Rd
l Rd
Ruben Dr
Dr
il
erh
Ov
Burleigh Pl
Bolter Ln
Killarney Way
r
kD
Par
Belgren Rd
t
in S
Ma
Beaufort Dr
r
Sierra D
Kossow Rd
Dr
Countr
Helene Dr
Dr
t
er
Lib
Highland Pass
Nike
r
Manhattan D
Cardinal Dr
ust
Stard
Mountain Dr
Enterprise Ave
Dora
Indian Trl
k Ln
Red Fox Dr
n
yn
yL
Maraljo Dr
Alta Vista Dr
Marcus Dr
Wolf Rd
Saratoga Rd
Pl
gham
Buckin
Woodch
uc
I-94
Dane Ct
Hoffman Ave
w Dr
Midland Pl
Ann Rita Dr
Astolat Dr
Coventry Dr
r
Ma
Bluem
ound
R
Dr
Rivervie
Brookdale Dr
n Dr
Tennyso
Jericho Dr
Johns
o
Cir
Bar
tlett
ld Ln
Wynfie
St
Ln
nt
Ln
ry
er
Rd
nR
River Rd
rb
Ba
ul
Pa
Nancy Ct
Wa
ter
tow
Ln
Ave
Almesbury
gwood
Burnin
o
km
Oa
ood Ln
Glenw
Joseph Rd
ra
Ventu
Rd
Kathryn Ct
Meadowood
Dr
Eldorado Dr
Du
blin
MN-8
Av
e
17
5
Lancaster Ave
ak Ln
Lone O
County Highway K
Wilderness Way
Ln
Roundy Dr
Pa
ris
h
Ln
Estate Cir
Burleigh Rd
Green Rd
n
Marjea
Lisa Ln
El Rio Dr
La
c
Thurston Ave
Carmen Ave
W Silver Spring Rd
Silver Spring Dr
Invery Dr
Honeysuckle Ln
t Ln
Redvere Dr
Ridgeview Dr
Primrose Ln
Arroyo Rd
ky
Richland P
ay
Gatew
D
Intertech
re s
ay
Vera Ln
Fair Oak Pky
eC
Azure Ln
Dr
d
Sh
ad
yL
Xing
wood
Creek
Shagbark Ln w
Vie
dow
Mea
Cherokee
ille R
d
ina R
Gum
Abb
ey
Whitetail Run
Meadow View
Ln
Danbur y Dr
t
rs e
me
o
S
Ma
pl
Wessex Dr
Ashford Ln
Scott
Ln
County Highway VV
Dr
tta
Joe
lainv
Dup
Rd
Ln
Dr
Wood
Ridge
gh
w
W Donna Dr
W Carmen Ave
Dr
sa
Me
Bette Dr
er R
d
l
Kendel P
ood Dr
Aspen Dr
Ct
D
rta
be
Ro
Waukesha Ave
Riv
Carol Dr
Ridgew
Hi
Brookside D
r
Wigwam Dr
e
v
A
l
u
a
Boboli K
nk Av
e
e Dr
du
MN-11
W Heather Ave
Rd
Fo
nd
Stanford C
t
State Highway 100
NS
th
14
5
n
Jerry L
Cedar Ridge
ge
Rid
Hi Tech Dr
Dr
an
g
Lo
e Dr
Dr
"
)
"
)
#
*
!
(
#
*
!
(
W Donges Bay Rd
W County Line Rd
#
*
!
(
#
*
!
(
#
*
!
(
W
X
St
at
e
Prudence Dr
Kohler Ln
Ln
ce
Spru
Dr
Le
on
Titan Dr
MN-7
thorn
St
#
*
!
(
Oakwood
Eileen Ave
Kathrn Ave
Beac
on
n
ta
Ti
Terra
c
Bonnie Ln
State Highway 100
Northwood Dr
r Dr
Antle
Fawn Ave
Claremore Cir
Vir ginia Ln
M
em
or
Patrita Dr
Woodland Dr
Stonewood Dr
Edelweiss Ln
Haw
y
alle
gV
Warren St
Albert Pl
Fairview Dr
Glacier Pky
e Ln
r
Colony Rd
Mill Rd
State Highway 190
g
Partrid
Sherwood
D
Skyline Dr
Lindsay Rd
Av
e
Rainbow Dr
p Dr
Hillto
ay
s Pky
n
clyn
Ma
Ct
w
igh
74
Robinhood Dr
Sunny D
ale
Bonnie Ln
Lon
Butternut Rd
Dr
WF
ores
t Vie
w Av
MN-9
Narrow Ln
Davies Ct
ilton
W Good Hope Rd
Valley View Dr
"
)
#
*
!
(
Tamarack Tr
ood
D
Hemlock Ln
State St
Willow Ln
*
!
(
County Line Rd
t
Mill S
Ham
WE
dgew
eH
at
t
S
Ra
cin
"
)#
Way
W
X
County Line Rd
r
Poplar D
State Highway 167
Brad
ley
MN-6
r
Ave
Grand
Plainview Dr
Good Hope Rd
Dr
dW
ay
Sheridan Dr
Destiny Dr
Chestnut Hill Rd
Be
av
er
Custer Ln
Weyer Rd
eD
Hillside Ln Hillside Ln
Un
ite
Forest Dr
dS
tat
St R
es
egis
Ln
l
Laure
Hi g
Dr
hw
ay
Roosevelt Dr
45
St Thom
Mar
a
s Dr
yhil
Cle
l Dr
vela
nd
Dr
Ave
ood
Elmw
Duke St
Blvd
Park
r
D
Christman Rd
Kings Hwy
ield
Menomonee
Falls Dam
a rf
Dr
rd
G
e
h
p
e
h
S at River Mile 21.9
ky
Bluff Rd
Elder Ln
Joss Pl
iver P
Riverside
ee R
n
o
m
Meno
Tyler Dr
Ann Ave
e Rd
Ridg
Seneca Dr
Forest Hill Ln
Wooded Hills Dr
State Highway 74
Ri
ch
fie
l
14
5
ln Dr
Linco
X
W
Dubnicka D
Saint
Jame
tD
res
erc
Dr
Jay
Susan Pl
Plain View Rd
Riv
Shady Ln
ay
Mars C
t
Northway
School Rd
Concord Rd
Na
va
jo
ig
hw
Bel Air Ln
Ra
intr
e
kD
17
5
Tours Dr
St
Santa Fe Dr
Donges Bay Rd
Revere Ln
ir
Scenic
D
Ln
ay
Menomonee Ave
ott
Sc
Old Farm Rd
ur
Lar ksp
gh
w
Stoneridge Dr
C
nd
be
ers
hway Y
Schlei Rd
N Lisbon Rd
Hi
Whitetail Run
Riv
L
WI
OW
CREEK
St
at
e
Lyle Ln
MN-5 Hedge Way

Wildrose Ln
"
)
#
*
!
(
County Hig
rs
unte
er Dr
Junip
e
Av
#
*
!
(
"
)
#
*
!
(
"
)
N O Connell Ln
e
Av
Trl
Hills
Hickory Dr
Willow Gate Pass
nd
ge
e
L
St
at
e
ss
w
Pa oha
M
ne
sto
#
*
!
(
Mequon Rd
Catskil
l Ln
ld
Fie
"
)
Francese Dr
Ln
bury r
Ash
D
ne
or
h
wt
Ha
Lilac Ln
Pheasant Ln
Sh
er
Grand Ave
E Freistadt Rd
W Riverland Dr
Washington Ct
Dr
w
rvie
Rive
e Ave
W Grac
Elm St
Grace Ave
Grace Ave
r
W Mulberry Dr
View D
W Park
iew
nn Dr
#
*
Sylvan Cir
W Holly Rd
Rosedale Dr
Heidel Rd
Trl
ma
Klien
41
Mequon Rd
Hilbe
rt Ln
Elm Ln
n
Mequo
Carnegie Dr
Vicksburg Ave
W Sunnyvale Rd
v
ark
NP
Clinton Dr
Main St
Elm Ln
Field D
Cresent Ln
Ct
in St
Edison Dr
Williams Dr
W Freistadt Rd
ie
gev
Rid
N Whilton Rd
ay
on
et
pl
Ap
ass
MN-4
MN-10
Rolling
W Cairdel Ln
N Lantern Ln
Fulton Dr
Morse Dr
Dr
W Madero Dr
N Brighton Pl
w
gh
P
ate
r
ore D
eg
Ston
S Sh
Highland Dr
#
*
!
(
Bunsen Dr Bunsen Dr
Hi
ill L
n
Lake Dr
Willow Creek Rd
es
at
St
Mequon Rd
er
H
W Ma
rseille
s
Oakwood Dr
Lovers Ln
Country Aire Dr
d
ite
Un
Hilltop Cir
Me
ek
#
*
"
)
"
)
Freistadt Rd
Park Ave
75
ay 1
L
HA
T
K
N
DE CREE
L
O
Highland Rd
N Ma
MN-3
MN-2
W Chapel Hill Rd
N Ridge Rd
ighw
Bark Lake Ln
Stonefield Rd
Av
e
eH
Stat
Hubertus Rd
Bark Lake Rd
du
La
c
VE
Fo
nd
Highland Rd
Holy Hill Rd
Hawthorne Farm Ln
hor
WS
ee Dr
Lovers Ln
Dr
Rockfield Rd
Map 8
STREAM CHANNEL AND BIOLOGICAL

QUALITY CONDITIONS WITHIN
W Bonniwell Rd
THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2000-2009
W Bonniwell Rd
Hawthorne Rd
RI
Dand
Dr
Glacier
e
Morain
Mount Ln
EE
Rd
Skyline Dr
State Highway 167
Dellwood Dr
MEN
Rockfield Rd
N Granville Rd
MN-1
lf
Wo
Evergreen Ct
Bonniwell Rd
ON
W Rockfield Rd
Polk St
N ORTH
N CH
Industrial Rd
Woodside Ln
Bonniwell Rd
Pleasant Hill Rd
BRA
Cedar Ln
County Highway W
Cedar Ln
n
Shady L
n
itatio
EC
Way
E Birchwood Ave
E Norse Ave
Ln
hwood
N Northwood Ln
N Birc
Lakewoo
dD
Ci r
N Lake Shore Dr
N Pebble Ln
N Lake Dr
N Tennyson Dr
N Bayside Dr
N Regent Rd
at
er
Ln
N Poplar Dr
By
w
E
Dr
NB
ea
ch
N Boyd Way
N Santa Monica Blvd
N
Ba
rne Bel
t t L mo
n
nt
Ln
N Mohawk Rd
N Larkin St
N Shepard Ave
N Maryland Ave
N Downer Ave
N Hackett Ave
N Cambridge Ave
N Prospect Ave
N Murray Ave
N Oakland Ave
N Farwell Ave
Dr
ial
mo
r
Me
Lin
c
Av
e
oln
La
ke
D
N Cramer St
N 10th St
N 10th St
N 12th Ln
N 11th St
sp
ec
t
N 14th St
N 13th St
N 15th St
N 14th St
N 17th St
N Bartlett Ave
N 11th St
N 12th St
N 14th St
N 12th St
N 16th St
N 18th St
N 19th St
Pr
o
N 15th Ln
N 19th St
N 17th St
N 21st St
N 23rd St
N 15th St
N 13th St
N 17th St
N 19th St
N 21st St
N 22nd St
N 16th St
N 22nd St
N 22nd St
N 24th St
N 23rd St
N 24th St
N 24th St
N Yates Rd
N Pheasant Ln
Tree R
d
N Elm
N 9th Ln
N 9th St
N 9th St N 9th St
N 8th St
Access Rd
N 7th St
N James Lovell St N 7th St
N 6th St
N 6th St
N 6th St
S 6th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N Mohawk Ave
N 4th St
N 4th St
N Navajo Ave
N 3rd St
N Lydell Ave
N
N 2nd St
N 2nd St
N Bay Ridge Ave
R
N 1st St N Lydell St
iv
S 2nd St
St
1st
N
N Kent Ave
er
N Achilles St
ce
N Shoreland Ave
N Palmer St
N Hubbard St
nt
er
N Richards St
N Berkeley Blvd
D
N Buffum St
r
N Diversey Blvd
N Holton St
N Booth St
N Jackson St
N Idlewild Ave
N Pierce St
N Fratney St
N Cass St
N Bremen St
N Weil St
N Har
N Marlborough Dr
N Humboldt Blvd
bor D
r
N Ardmore Ave
N Woodburn St

N Sunny Point Rd
N Glen Park Rd
N 21st St
N 20th St
N 24th St
I-43
N Chadwick Rd
N Pheasant Ln
N Skyline Ln
N River Rd
Dr
ide
NW
ay
s
N 24th St
N 24th Pl
N 26th St
N 26th St
N 28th Pl
N 31st St
N 34th St
S 3rd St
S Ellen St
S Brust Ave
E Howard Ave
SW
hit
Ave
na E Bolivar
ll A
ve
S 5th St
S 2nd St
S Pennsylvania Ave
S Logan Ave
S Pine Ave
eA
ve
S 3rd St
5th 794
S 10th St
S 13th St
ar
E St Francis Ave
E Norwich Ave
S Lenox St S Lenox
St
S Griffin Ave
S Austin St
S Taylor Ave
S 5th Pl
S Brust Ave
S Clement Ave
State Highway 38
S 1st Pl
S 1st St
S 15th St
S 15th St
S 18th St
S 16th St
I-94
S 22nd St
De
law
E Car ol St
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
S Howell Ave
S Burrell St
S 8th St
S 9th Pl
S 11th St
S 3rd St
S 5th St
S 5th Pl
S 7th St
S 8th St
S 8th St
S 10th St
S 12th St
S 14th St
S 17th St
S 20th St
S 21st St
S 22nd Pl
S 23rd St
S 1st Pl
S 18th St
S 15th St
S 16th St
S 19th St
S 19th St
S 25th St
S 23rd St
S 26th St
S 1st St
S 4th St
S 11th St
ke
Av S 12th St
e
S 10th St
ind
la
S 15th Pl
S 15th St W
S 17th St
S 19th St S 19th St
S 9th St
S 6th St
S Mar
ilyn S
t
S 29th St
S 31st St
ST
uck
aw
ay
Dr
S 26th St
S 25th St
Ln
Somers
et
S 14th St
S 22nd St
S 24th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 21st St
S 29th St
S Point Ter
S 34th
St
S 33rd St
ay
3
th St
S 36
S 39th S
t
S 37th St
S 3rd St
Co
Mu
m
s
sk
eg tock
oA
Av
e
S 17th St ve
S 21st St
S 24th St
S Layton Blvd
S 28th St
S 26th St
S 33rd St
S 34th St
S 37th St
gh
w
Hi
Sta
te
S 42nd St
S 14th St
S 28th St
S 31st St
S 30th St
S 32nd St
S 34th St
S 35th St
S 34th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 40th St
S 40th St
S 48th St
46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St
S 44th St
N 21st Ln
State Highway 57
N 28th St
N 31st St N 31st St
N 30th St
N 40th St
N Lite Ln N 39th St N 38th St
N 37th Pl
N 37th St
S 40th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
S 37th St
S 43rd St
Miller Park Way

S 42nd St
S 43rd St
S 43rd St
S 45th St
S 47th St
S 46th St
S 50th St S 50th St
N Baker Rd
N Flint Rd
N Bethmauer Ln
N 25th St
N 25th St
N 26th St
N 25th St
N 27th St
N 29th St
N 32nd St
N 35th St
N 34th St
N 37th St
N 39th St
N Grant Blvd
N 41st St
N 44th St
S 45th St
S 47th St
S 47th St
S 51st St
S 52nd St
Mulberry Dr
S 51st St
y
Eas
twa
N Crestwood Dr
N Braeburn Ln
N Bethmaur Ln
N Seville Ave
N 34th St
N 29th St
N 28th St
N 38th St
N 36th St
S 32nd St
S 52nd St
N 27th St
N 33rd St
N 36th St
N 36th St
N 39th St
N 39th St
N 41st St
N 42nd Pl
N 44th St
S 47th St
S 49th St
S 54th St
S 53rd St
S 52nd St
Dr
field
N Navajo Rd
N Dean Ct
N Range Line Rd
NP
elic
an
L
N 35th St
N 32nd St
N 39th St
N 37th St
N 34th St N 34th St
N 36th St
N 38th St
N 40th St
N 42nd Pl
N Sherman Blvd
N 42nd St
N 44th St
N 45th St
N 46th St
N 47th St
N 50th Pl N 50th Pl
N
Alo
is
St
S 51st St
S 53rd St
N 40th St
N 42nd St
N 41st St
N 44th St
N 46th St
N 47th St
N 47th St
N 50th St
N 51st St
N 53rd St
N 56th St
N 54th St
ley Rd
S 56th St
S 57th St
S 55th St
S 57th St
S 60th St
S 61st St
Lake Shore Dr
NP
ine
hu
rs t
N Spruce Rd
N Valley Hill Rd
Upper River Ct
N 40th St
N 45th St
N 47th St
N 49th St
N 48th St
N 50th St
N 50th St
N 49th St
N 52nd St
N 54th St
N 57th St
N Haw
Rd
S 58th St
S 59th St
S 61st St
rd S
t
S 63
S 64th St
Man
s
Broad St
Willow Glen Ct
I-43
N San Marino Dr
N Oriole Ln
Stratford Pl
Grasslyn Rd
Valley Hill Dr
N Upper River Rd
Charter M
al
N Range Line Rd
Gazebo Hill Pky
er Ct
N Kilde
N 41st St
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 52nd St
N 51st Blvd
N 54th St
N 53rd St
N 55th St
N 58th Blvd
N 59th St
N 58th St
N 59th St
N 60th St
S Ha
wley
S 62nd St
S 64th St
St
S 65th
S 68th St
S 69th St
Ex
We eter St
stw
ay
Apri
cot C
t
Azale
a Ct
S 7th St
N Link Pl
N 51st Blvd
N 52nd St
N 55th St
N 56th St
N 55th St
N 58th St
N 57th St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 62nd St
N 64th St
S 65th St
S 66th St
S 67th St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 79th St
Oriole Ln
n
lac L
N Li
Riverland Rd
Justin Dr
N Canterbury Dr
N River Rd
N Arbon Dr
N 49th St
N 47th St
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 44th St
N 52nd St
N 51st St
St
N5
3 rd
N Presidio Dr
N 54th St
N 56th St
N 58th St
N 58th St
N 61st St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 63rd St
ir
Washington
C
S 66th St
S 65th St
W P S 63rd St
ark R
S 62nd St
d
S 71st St
S 67th St
S 69th St
S 72nd St
S 72nd St
S 75th St
S 77th St
S 80th St
S 80th St
S 82nd St
S 81st St
S 84th St
Beechwood Dr
N Fieldwood Rd
N Madero Dr
r Austin Ave
N Countr
N 52nd St
N 55th St
N 57th St
N 55th St
N Highview Dr
N 59th St
N River Bend Ct
N Riebs Ln
N 59th St
N 62nd St
N 60th St
N 60th St
N 64th St
N 63rd St
N 65th St
N 65th St
N 66th St
N 68th St
NS
hole
s Av
N 65th St N
e
Car
lton
N 64th St
Pl
N 62nd St
N 61st St
N 67th St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 73rd St
S 75th St
S 73rd St
S 74th St
S 76th St
S 79th St
N Le Mont Blvd
Baehr Rd
N Bethanne Dr
ura L
n
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 66th St
N 69th St
N 69th St
N 70th St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 77th St
S 77th St
S 80th St
S 81st St
S 83rd St
y View D
N Eastgate Dr
Industrial Dr
N Enterprise Dr
N Ma
N 66th St
N 68th St
N 71st St
N 71st St
N Lefeber Ave
N 72nd St
St
N7
4th
N 75th St
N 78th St N 78th St
N Hon
S 82nd St
N 70th St
N 73rd St
N 75th St
N 77th St
N 79th St
N 80th St
Day Ct
ey Cre
ek Pky
g Ave
Elm Spri
n
S 86th St
Av
e
Bu
rd
ick
W
S 91st Pl
N 67th St
N 67th St
N 74th S
t
N 75th St
State Highway 181
N 81st St
N 83rd St
N 86th St
S 88th St
S 90th St
S 92nd St
S 93rd St
S 94th St
S 93rd St
ie L
n
S 106th St
St
at S 104th St
e
H
ig
hw
ay
24
N 69th St
N 71st St
N 73rd St
N 80th St
N 82nd St
N 78th St
N 85th St
N 86th St
N 88th St
N 89th St
S 89th St
S 91st St
S 93rd St
S 93rd St
S 96th St
S 96th St
N 72nd St
N Swallow Ln
N 76th Pl
N 77th St
N 80th St
N 82nd St
N 84th St
N 83rd St
N 86th St
N 88th St
N 89th St
S 91st St
S 94th Pl
S 93rd St
S 95th St
S 99th St
S 98th St
S 98th St
S 100th St
S 101st St
S 104th St
N 73rd St
N 80th St
N 78th
St
81
st
St
N 86th St
N 87th St
N 90th St
N 89th St
N 87th
St
N 91st St
N 90th St
N 91st St
N 89th St
N 91st St
N Swan Blvd
N 95th St
Rd
S 97th St
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 102nd St
S 103rd St
S 107th St
Oakbrook Dr
State Highway 100
S 110th St
S 67th Pl
N Faulkner Rd
E
TL
N 92nd St
N 94th St
N 93rd St
N 95th St
r
Co
lo
ni
al
D
Ac
ce
ss
I-894
S 100th St
S 109th St
S 111th St
S 112th St
S 112th St
S 116th St
S Main St
S Orchard St
N Buntrock Ave
N Bridge
Wauwatosa Rd
Pioneer Dr
Av
e
ce
Jo
y
N
N 86th S
t
N 95th St
LIT
Dr
anor
N 95th St
N 97th Pl
N 100th St
N
N 102nd St
S 105th St
S 114th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
St
Lake Shore Dr
d
Gre
en B
ay R
w Ct
W Rid
gevie
r
water D
Vega Ave
Solar Ave
N Silver Ave
N Swan Rd
Concord Dr
St
N 96th
N Pa
rk M
EK
RE
N Kn
oll Blv
d
N 105th St
N Mayfair Rd
N 110th Pl
S 116th St
S 122
nd St
S 122nd St
S 118th
S 124th St
S 124th St
S Nicolet Dr
Riverland Rd
Cedarburg Rd
N Windsor Ct
RIV
ER
Dr
Foxk
irk
N 103rd St
N 101st St
N 105th St
N 106th St
N 108th St
N 110th St
N 111th St
N 112th St
N 113th St
N 115th St
N 119th St
N 117th St
S 117th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S 128th St
S 127th St
S 130th St
Dr
poin
te
High
N 100th St
N 99th St
N 102nd St
N 104th St
N 106th St
N 98th St
N Lovers Lane Rd

N 117th S
t
N 124th St
Longwood Ave
N 99th St
N 109th St
N 115th St
N 116th St
N 118th St
N 119th St
N Park Dr
Sheraton Rd
SW
ilso
nD
S 115th St
S 92nd St
t
hS
N1
15
T
N 119th St
N 118th St
N 125th St
N 124th St
N 126th St
Burlawn Pky
Mayfair Dr
N 122nd St
Old Lantern Dr
S 134th St
Loftus Ln
Ash Ct
S Sunnyslope Rd
Hillside Dr
N Davis Rd
ME N OM ON
EE
N 107th St
CR
Alquran Ct
N 124th St
r
Park Dr
N 128th St
N 127th St
N 135th St
N 134th St
N Fiebrantz Dr
Parkside Dr
N 131st St
S Elm Grove Rd
S Sunny Slope Rd
t Ct
Silver M
is
S Fairlane Ave
S Meadowmere Pky
S Li
lac L
n
S Glen Par
k Rd
Forest Ave
N Farmdale Rd
LIT TLE
N Granville Rd
K
EE
RK
PA
A
Parkwa
yD
River Dr
Marach Rd
Campbell Dr
CH
BUTLER
DIT
Stone Dr
N 144th St
S Brookland Rd
t
S 145th St
7th
S
S 14
S Manor Dr
Av
e
at
io
na
l
N
N Briarhill Rd
CREEK
N Granville Rd
ON E
E
OM
MEN
Dr
N Council Hills
124th St
TZK
DRE
N 124th St
Dr
iew
Pa
rk v
Claas Rd
Lilly Rd
Oak Ln
LY
LIL
Dolphin Dr
Highland Dr
S Wildwoo
S Ronke Ct
S James Dr
S Moorland Rd
W
S Delphine Dr
S Small Rd
Rd
Wasaukee Rd
AN
Lilly Rd
CREEK
Ash Dr
r
D
N 149th St
N 148th St
N 147th St
Lone Tree Rd
Woodland Ave
Vist
aV
iew
d Dr
Dr
Ter
way
Gre
en
S 159th St
S Town Road
S Casper Dr
Melville
D
Woodview Dr
M
in
eo
la
r
Badge
rD
DOUSM AN DIT CH
N Moorland Rd
Service Dr
S Executive Dr
S 170th St
S 171st St
S Calhoun Rd
San Juan Trl

Sauk Trl
Cullen Dr
t
Churchview Dr
od Dr
Melody Ln
Indianw
o
N 166th St
S Forest Ln
S 167th St
S 169th St
S 171st St
S West Ln
S 179 St
CH
Fond du Lac Ave
Amber Dr
N OR-XWAY
Henry Stark Rd
Held Dr
Norman Dr
Sylvan Ln
Franklin Dr
Northpoint
Dr
Honey Ln
Northwood Dr
Ox
for
dS
t
Oakwood Dr
Ln
Elm
Countryside Dr
Pheasant Ln
Pilgrim Rd
N 161st St
N 159th St
N 158th St
Bradee Rd
Sm
ith C
Hillsdale Dr
Norhardt Dr
Mierow Ln
Patrick Blvd
S Michael Dr
S Woefel Rd
SW
illia
ms
Wasaukee Rd
NE
L
Preserve Pky
Pilgrim Rd
Neptune Dr
Colonial Dr
Water St
Arthur Ave
N 167th St
N 169th St
N Calhoun Rd
teau
Dr
Woelfel Rd
Talon Trl
Pilgrim Pky
Penn Ct
N 162nd St
N 160th St
Greenview Ave
Lincrest Dr
Nas
ouse Dr
Coach H
Fiserv Dr
S Stigler Rd
SR
S Cari Ada
m Dr
S 132nd St
Squire Dr
Wagon Trl
Mary Ct
Shady Ln
Trl
Oak Ridg
e
Evelyn Ter
Bexley Dr
Tilton Ln
d
R
Eg
an
r
olli
ng
D
oun
tr
SC
S Acredale Rd
Marcy Rd
Shasta Dr
Imperial Dr
sau
D
N Brookfield Rd
Elizabeth Ct
N Janacek Rd
y Ln
S Johnson Rd
S Racine Ave
S Brennan Dr
S Andrae Dr
Western Ave
Dr
Allen Ave
Robert Ave
Wildwood Dr
Wilson
Dr
Town Hall Rd
Dr
son
Jac
k
Le Ch
a
Derrin Ln
Poplar Creek Dr
Catskill Rd
S Barker Rd
S Danny Rd
S Swartz Rd
yne
D
Bisc
a
Division Rd
Joper
R
Bancroft Dr
Pre
mie
r Ln
To
we
rR
d
Marcy Rd
Clover Ln
N Barker Rd
Jaclyn Dr
Sunnycrest Dr
Copenhill Rd
S Shady Ln
S 200th St
S 199th St
S Iowa Ave
W Iona Ter
1
ay 1
Sh
or
e
S Arctic Ave
S 5th Pl
W Goldcrest Ave
Stat
ghw
e Hi
S 7th St
Dr
wa
st
Ea
W Parnell Ave
W Denis Ave
S 9th St
S 21st St
reek
W Denis Ave
W Mallory Ave
S 7th St
W Halsey Ave
ve
cA
nni
icki
inn
SK
Ave
eld
ayfi
SD t
S
llen
SE
St
W Armour Ave
St
E Plainfield Ave
r
rio
pe
Su
th
14
S 5th St
E Waterford Ave
W Martin Ln
W Norwich St
S Herman St
W Tripoli Ave
W Water ford Ave
y St
E Holt Ave
E Morgan Ave
W Saveland Ave
W Howard Ave
E Idaho St
E Ohio Ave
E Wilbur Ave
Ir
S
on
E Layton Ave
W Vogel Ave
W Wanda Ave
Access Rd
W Eden Pl
W Holmes Ave
E Euclid Ave
S 15th Pl
W Barnard Ave
ve
Ave ell A
ter
s
t
s
o
u
EP
ER
E Gauer Cir
E Oklahoma Ave
W Holt Ave
W Colony Dr
E Homer St
E Montana St
E Dakota St
W Ohio Ave
W Bolivar Ave
E Lincoln Ave
E Linus St
S Ba
St
Ct
D
ay
d
ar
W
Rd
Park
W Montana St
rk w
Pa
St
E Stewart
E Bay St
Dr
W Cleveland Ave
W Bottsford Ave
W Ramsey Ave
W Hayes Ave
r
arbo
SH
Dr
W Harrison Ave
es St
W Lapham St
ve
eA
E Jon
4
I-79
W Arthur Ave
W Madison St
W Greenfield Ave
S 5th
S Amor Dr
on
St
rferry
S Ca
Pioneer Trl
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
p
Ra m
S Springdale Rd
St
Hill
I- 43
st
re
Fo
m
Ho
S 24th St
S Valley Ln
W Washington St
W Plainfield Ave
ney C
S Ho
Ter
S Edinbourgh Dr
Forest Dr
Kurt Dr
EE
Nigbor
Orchard Dr
Maple Rd
N Willow Ln
N Lannon Rd
Martha Ln
Springdale Rd
Knollwood Dr
R
VE
RI
Fawn Ln
Woodside Ln
Well
ingto
n Dr
Lannon Rd
One Mile Rd
Town Line Rd
Catherine Ct
Dr
Mary Buth Ln
County Highway G
Lan
cel
ot D
ON
OM
Stonewood Dr
EN
M
16
7
ay
gh
w
Hi
St
at
e
Rd
La
nn
on
Lannon Rd
r
ies
D
Dav
Dr
Villag
e
Lynwood Dr
Rd
E Wells St
W Kilbourn Ave
EA
lbi
St
rie
EE
t
rS
ate
SW
Dr
t
E State S
o ry
WT
E Park Pl
E Belleview Pl
E Webster Pl
N Astor St
St
Park Fwy E Knapp
Access Rd
Cherokee
N Gordon Pl
W Vliet St
ren St
N Van Bu
Ch
ea
ne
y
l
nP
N Marshall St
W Vine St
t
N Water S
N Plankinton Ave
Ava
lo
Ram n Dr
ona
Rd
r
bu
St
W Brown St
E Capitol Dr
E Linnwood Ave
E North Ave
E Garfield Ave
E Lloyd St
St
E Brown St
rce E Kane Pl
e
mm E Hamilton St
Co
N
E Brady St
rd
Elmwood Dr
E Jarvis St
E Kenwood Blvd
E Meinecke Ave
N 9th St
Misty Ln
E Olive St
E Hartford Ave
E Wright St
lya
Ha
Whitehall St
N Morris Blvd
vd
E Lake Bluff Bl
E Locust St
N 16th St
N 18th St
S 28th St
ook
Guthrie Dr
xe
Pky
32
elu
E Glendale Ave
E Kensington Blvd
er
Sh
Ln
y
wa
gh
Hi
e
at
St
Rd
es
ad N Newhall St
WD
W Hadley St
W Galena St
W Wells St
S 23rd St
W Grant St
Ln
Foxcroft Ln
E Henry Clay St
lis
Pa
view
E Circle Dr
We
st
E Birch Ave
oo
d
E Silver Spring Dr
SOUTH MEN OMON EE

W Florida St
MN-19 CAN AL
W Bruce St
BURN HAM
E National Ave
CAN AL
W Becher St
ry
Ct
N Fox Hollow Rd
Scott Ln
Hilltop Dr
River Ln
McCormick Dr
Merkel Dr
Shadow Wood Dr
Fox Ln
Ln
Sp
ri n
gh
ill
Ln
Oa
k
Whitehorse Dr
Town Line Rd
Elmwood Rd
Tamarack Rd
F
Longv riess Pl
iew R
d
Pleasant View Dr
Maple Rd
Goldendale Rd
N Town Line Rd
Amy Belle Rd
Amy Belle Ln
Colgate Rd
Sussex Rd
E Day Ave
E Lake View Ave
Ln
E Belle Ave
nD
ilso
NW
Fo
xw
Rd
gacre
N Lon
d
rd y R
mba
N Lo
E Chambers St
St
Ave
Ln
E Daisy Ln
W Burleigh St
ns
ki
op
No
rth
EW
ye
Es
tab E Hampton Ave
roo
kP
ky
e
W Gar field Av
W Orchard St
ru
Concord
E Hyde Way
N Park Rd
Wilhar Rd
d Rd
irchil
Rd
Tre
e
Cir
School Rd
N Ironwood Rd
Lon
e
N Club
W Ring St
E Good
rich Ln
W Locust St
W Clarke St
St
Westwood
D
n
E Fox L
E Keefe Ave
oe
Jennifer Ln
E Bradley Rd
N Fa
ss
Acce
let Rd
n Nico
N Jea
N Ironwood Ln
N 19th Pl
r
on
Butler Dr
Dr
E Willow R
E Acacia Rd
ton A
ve
W Columbia St
W Mineral St
Milky Way Rd
N Point
E Dean Rd
W Dean Rd
E Chicago St
W Rogers St
S 36th St
r
enb
Gre
ay
SB
onn
Country Aire Dr
Rocky Ln
Robinhood Dr
S Mayfield Rd
Oak Dr
Colgate Rd
Ln
N Pelham Pky
r
no
Ma
N 18th St
t
th S
N 19
State Highway 74
vd
Bl
ica
on
Dr ta M
ly
n
a
er
av N S
W
N Iroquois Rd
Ln
N 19th Pl
N 21st St
D
ke
La
ia D
ant
l
il P
ve
rA
ay 164
land Dr
N Court
o
equ
NS
s
hea
NP
e
Av
Rd gview
N Pierron
e
on
Av
NL
ra
rda
NA
N Neil Pl
Ne
te
ex
State Hig
hw
Dr
Wooded Ridge Trl
Dr
okdale
an Dr
Sherid
N Spruce Ln
resta
N Bro
N Greenview Dr
N la C
e Ci r
N Grasslyn Rd
Waukesha Ave
Ln
D
olia
e Tre
e D
e Av N
Gree
nbria
rR
N Shorecliff
stone Pl
N Haddon
agn
NM
N Pin
E Buttles Pl
W Abert Pl
W Wright St
W Cold Spring Rd
W Edgerton Ave
Seton Pl
amp
t
sS
W Pierce St
Dr
Churchw
Northway
S 41st St
S 46th St
r
id
ac
Pl
Dr
W Abbott Ave
WH
W Canal St
W Tripoli Ave
S 49th St
rial Cir
Dr
Dr
N Pine Shore
l Dr
N Atwah
rgyl
NA
S 44th St
S 46th St
th Pl
an D
othm
S Str
S 50
S 56th St
S 61st St
S 66th St
y
rle
Mo
Greenway
Parkview Rd
W Park
r
Shore D
y Pl
N 31st St
Pl
eve
E Fairmount Ave
W Keefe Ave
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
R
oint
E Chateau Pl
W Mc Kinley Blvd
W Juneau Ave
W Highland Ave
W Highland Blvd
W State St
W Burnham St
W Tesch Ave
W Armour Ave
el Ave
W Vog
W Berg
e n Dr

Access Rd
W Melvina St
W Vliet St
W Scott St
W Van Beck Ave
yP
E Ba
E Ellsworth Ln
W Silver Spring Dr
W Birch A
ve
W Olive St
W Garfield Ave
W Lloyd St
Gr
e Ln
E Fairy Chasm Rd
iew D
W Riverv
e
e Av
Sall
W la
W Lawn Ave
W Meinecke Ave
Ave
lainfield
W Plainfield Ave W P
W Leroy Ave
W Leroy Ave
S Impe
Greenhill Ln
W Grange Ave
Dr
EE
S Sunset Dr
ve
sA
sett
chu
N Glen
idne
NS
St
W Clarke St
W Montana St
Av
e
W Hadley St
W
W Hayes Ave
Fil
lm
W Rita Dr
ore
W
Dr
Je
re
lyn
Pl
W Cleveland Ave
dD
lan
Mid
ar
ne
W Concordia Ave
EE
Rd
E Ravin
W St Paul Ave
ve
cA
ctri
e
l
E
W Norwich Ave
St
Westlake Dr
S 78th St
land D
tr y Ln
N Coun
N Valley Dr
ir
al
t re
on
M
W Hope Ave
W Mount Vernon Ave
St
nia Ave 32nd St

N
N Teuto
c
ar
on
Pky
Dr E Juniper Ct
E Juniper Ln
E Ravine Baye
W Courtland Ave
St
W
W Glendale Ave
At
kin
so
n A W Ruby Ave
ve
W Cornell St
W Congress St
W Michigan St
W Mitchell St
obi
le
Dr
WP
urd
ue
W Garfield Ave
bo
nA
ve W Brown St
W
W Vine St
Sa
rno
w
St W Walnut St
W Galena St
WM
W Cameron Ave
W Chambers St
tin
ar
W Glen River Rd
W Bender Rd
W Villard Ave
W Burleigh St
WO
N 38th Pl
t
N 50th S
Highland Ave
y
Pk
Ln
an C
N De
N 38th St
urg Rd
t
ns S
opki
N 48th St
N Hi Mount Blvd
R
SC
OD
S 54th St
Seitz
Dr
Ca Downing Dr
va
lin
lie
g
rD
Ln
r
Bobolink Ln
lighter
N Cedarb
NH
N 53rd St
n
ela
St James Ln
N Lamp
d
Fairfield R
Ct
side
adow
N Me
N 50th St
N 51st St
G
ra
or
Sh
Mulberry Dr
Service Rd
N 54th St
tory
NS
W Cherry St
W Grant St
W Allerton Ave
2nd
S8
W Mid
iew
Lis
lyn
od
Wo
W Fairfield Ct
W Bender Rd
W Auer Ave
W Hadley St
SEWRPC.
W Acacia Rd
W Lancaster Ave
S 61st St
Pl
W Leroy Ave
W Dosie Ave
W Carpenter Ave
nd
v
dD
elan
5
ay
N 54th Blvd
60th St
W Eden Pl
W Tesch Ave
W Whitaker Ave
Gr
a
N Fairway Ln
hw
Hi g
N 54th St
5
14
W Adler St
W Elm St
W Kiehnau Ave
W Marion St
W Dixon St
CR
a
ass
W Crawford Ave
N Colony D r
hor
WS
N River Rd
N River Trail Rd
te
Sta
N 55th Pl
ay
D
on
St
W Wilbur Ave
W Waterford Ave
Ln
od
wo
llen 98th St
S
SA
e Rd
hw
ig
W Waterford Sq
t
S 99th S
S 113th St
tz Rd
S Kur
Balboa Dr
St
11th 111th St
S1
S
Ln
W Ridg
W Park Hill Ave
l
rP
e
ch
Be
e St
eyenn
W Keefe Ave
W Townsend St
MN-18
W Washington St
S 75th
W Warnimont Ave
S 88th St
t
th S
S 111th St
S 117th St
m Ave
W Main St
W Dickinson St
SM
W Holt Ave
W Morgan Ave
Rd
W Hemlock
W Concordia Ave
1 Miles
W Miller Dr
W Larkspur Ln
W Heather Ln
W Woodbury Ln
W Meinecke Ave
Pl
enton
W Tr
W Center St
Dr
S 99
St
2nd
Dr
t St
rk
wla
ha
W Up
S 78th St
Y
NE
S 10
e
shir
St
s
121
g
in
W Fairview Ave
t
ey S
er
re y
n
tto
ra
St
iver
7th
S 11
Blvd
S 122nd St eado
SM
r
Sp
Martin Dr
W Layton Ave
Pl
W Wisconsin Ave
W Madison St
D
elt
ev
s
oo
W Washington St
W Chapman Ave
Dr
ilip
Ph
l
tP
oy
0.5
Trillium Rd
r Ln
Source:
Aste
W Dean Rd
W Stack Dr
W Dakota St
W Dakota St
W Kinnickinnic River Pky
W Manitoba St W Manitoba St
Ave
nett
e
Ben
Av
W
W Bennett
W Oklahoma Ave
W Lakefield Dr
W
H
e
W
Av
one
W Euclid
y Cr
Ru
eek
sk
Dr
in
St
W Ohio Ave
MN-16
W Allerton Ave
n
ee
t
ing
ash
aW
earn
WK
R
er
W Eden Pl
rth
Ma
HO
W Cleveland Ave
W Montana Ave
e
at
St
Cedar St
S 69th St
S 89th St
S 101st St
St
2nd
S 10
St
04th
S1
St
S 106th
e
W Harrison Av
n
ar L
Ce d
W Kenboern Dr
W Congress St
W Congress St
W Wright St
Wellauer Dr
rk wa
y Dr
E Ravine Dr
W Zedler Ln
W Club View Dr
W Fairmount Ave
E North Point Rd
State Highway 32
W Kiley St
W Ch
Isolated Natural
Resource Area
W el Rancho Dr
Corridor
Mequon Rd
W Fiesta Ln
dar Ln
W Rochelle Ave
W Custer Ave
W Washington Blvd
St Jam Vista Ave

es St
W Wells St
yA
ve
Corridor
W Bradley Rd
ay
W Monrovia W
W Florist Ave
W Chambers St
W Garfield Ave
N 68th St
S 85th St
S 87th St
S 106th St
S 95th St
S 103rd St
S 104th St
St
W Arthur Ave
W Ce
W Hemlock St
W Tupelo St
Ki
le

Less than 75 Feet
Enclosed Channel
W Ranch Rd
W Calumet Rd
W Portage St
W Capitol Pky
W Chestnut St
Rive
r Pk
y
Maple Ter
N 76th St
S 105th
Rd
W Arthur Pl
W Pa
W North Ave
W Lloyd St
W Hicks St
W Harding Pl
Dr
Ave
Church St Dewey
N 93rd St
h St
N 95t
N 98th St
vice
Ser
r Ridge
S Rive
SR
N 72nd St
Access Rd
N 104th St
N 106th St
Pl
ge
ita
m
Ar
W Marion St
W Stevenson St
W Dixon S
O Connor St
W Mitchell St
W Maple St
e
Av
W Moltke Ave
Avon Ct
W McMyron St
W Walker St
Yale Pl
Milwauke
e Ave
Portland Ave
ns
W Ruby Ave
W Center St
ve
dA
o
o
Co
e
nc
ta
N Wauwatosa Ave
ing Blv
t
0th S
Rd
W Chester St
W Adler St
Rd
N 67th St
r
e
Te
Av
on
rd
Le
fo
ed
M
N Hard
N 10
Woodside
Ln
W Fairy Chasm Rd
W Douglas Ave
e
Av
W Melvina St
e
a Av
ienn
V
W
Livingston Ave
MN-17A
W Glen Oaks Ln
Range Line Ter
W Woolworth Ave
W Keefe Ave Pky
Stickney Ave
Rogers Ave
W Woodland Ave
Hillcrest Dr
W Rogers St
t
loi
Be
N 82nd St
N 84th St
N 87th St
ky
rP
ive
W Lorraine Pl
W Clarke St
W Schlinger Ave
Dr
W Keefe Ave
W Sheridan Ave
W Birch Ave
a
os
nt
N 75th St
W Nash St
ll St
Conne
ve
lA
N 74th St
1
y4
wa
gh
Hi
t
e
N 78th S
Av tes
ett Sta
ck ed
Be nit
e
U
Av
W
ton
us
Ho
W Vienna Ave
Jackson Par k Blvd
oo
dP
ky
l
sP
aye
ra
N
Ci
r
W Concordia Ave
W Auer Ave
at
e
CREEK
Av
e
W Hope Ave
te
N Pearlette Ln
N 70th St
N Servite Dr
e
Av
e
Av
R
ee
on
N 92nd St
m
no
Me
N 97th St
N 108th
th St
St
S 121st St S
Nicolet Dr
W Godsell Rd
N 84th St
St
Co
lga
W Hawthorne Ave
WP
allo
tine
W Parnell Ave
N 85th
l
den P
rw
Ha
WH
ollm
SW
S 119
nd
22
S1
Dr
ll D
no
yk
ar
S Frances Av
S la Salle Dr
S Greentree Dr
Pky
d
ar
en
rtland
let Dr
S Nico
S Cou
Rd
W Villard Ave
Kenyon Ave
W Arthur Ave
na
tio
ed
fo
r
W Thrush Ln
W Edward Dr
W Spring Ln
W Douglas Ave
W Thurston Ave
W Thurston Cir
Access Rd
W Sheridan Av
nd
D
10 - 19 Poor
20 - 29 Fair
30 - 39 Good
40 - 49 Very Good
50 - 59 Excellent
Riparian Corridor
Buffer Widths
Dorothy Pl
W River Oaks Ln
W Parkland Ave
W Green Tree Rd
W Brentwood Ave
ve
e
tA
Av
er
b
tto
r
e
e
lm
H
W Stark St
Pa
W
W
W Hampton Ave
ac
m
to
Po
Av
e
Ridge Blvd
W Hayes Ave
Na
er F
ore
st D
r
W Woodale Ave
W Mill Rd
W Florist Ave
bo
n
W Manitoba St
W Woodside Dr
Be
rl i
n
St
N 113th St
ky
rP
Rd
ve
a
Ri
sh
ke
au
W
Dr
Ne
w
Lis
I-94
A St
W Clovernook St
State Highway 190
Un
de
rw
W Lincoln Ave
W Edgerton Ave
N 98th St
S
ay
ot
Ro
C
le
W Acacia St
NI
ndu
Li strial
m
Rd
a
St
Douglas Ave
W Lawrence Ave
W Dean Rd
W Boehlke Ave
W Bender Ave
e
Av
W Ar
N 95th
w
len
S Pohl Dr
y
lle
Va
Pl
ky
er P
S Alfred St
n
Su
Pl
Sth
1
Te
r
W Mitchell St
Ha
N 86th St
N 86th Pl
Ct
NG
N 116th St
er
at
N 94th St
N 103rd St
N 108th
00
ay 1
N 116th St
ti
H
ur
C
C
S
K
AN
EE
BR
TH
CR
SO U
OD
ERW O
UN D
W Cold Spring Rd
Sunburs
t Ln W Bobwood Rd
e
Av
e
Av
ighw
Kn
oll
W Becher St
nk
rba
Bu
c
La
on
et
pl
Ap
te H
Sta
W Scarborough Dr
W Linfield Dr
sn
o
Ave
St
W Hustis
W Denver Ave
du
St
eR
a Cir
Fr
e
W Joleno Ln
W Good Hope Rd
W Custer Ave
Pr
iv
W Rogers St
nd
Fo
St
N 115th
N 118th St
N 122nd St
rov
Kenmar Rd
S Victori
Ave
N 114th
e
Av
N 120th St
EE
G
Elm
r
y
bl
sS
t
ES
g
ag
Fl
W Innov
ation Dr
W Morgan Ave
W Eden Trl
N 87th St
St
Pl
on
et
pl
Ap
Blvd
CR
s
op
sh
Bi
ll D
em
W
Ave
e
Av
ch
Bir
W Lapham St
W Hayes Ave
Rd
W Ohio Dr
W Wilbur Dr
oon
clid
W Eu
W Crawford Dr
n
An
rk
Pa
N River Trail Dr
N Arbor D
e
Blue Ridg
Ln
n
Park L
Hi
Lag
W Cleveland Ave
Dr
re Dr
ointe
ieldp
F
W
Rd N
N 111th St
N 124th St
N 129th St
ock
r
er
nk
Bu
yce
le
vil
an
5
14
N 131st St
lyh
Hol
oD
c
Kis
OO
Tru Ln
RW
t
un
Mo
W Lilac Ln
W Montana Ave
Rd
PARK
Po
rt
Av
e
W Schroeder Dr
W Radcliffe Dr
ange
St
Ave
rch
WA
W Calumet Rd
W Lynx Ave
W Walker St
Dr
Park
W Honey Ln
W Park Ave
N Jo
Gr
ad
N Lilly Rd
DE
W Grange Ave
Ro
Manor Hills Blvd
UN
bor
nA
ve
W Meadow Ln
W Prospect Dr
W Forest Dr
alla
Dr
N O Connell Ln
e
at
St
Ct
Dr
3
I-4
l
al
W Bluemound
ear
WR
Ln
W Ravine
Dr
un
R
r
ee
D
W
W Wahner Ave
W Darnel Ave
Service Rd
ul Av
e
By
ro
n
W Potter Rd
W Wells St
W Madison St
W Ferguson Rd
Paddock Pky
rw
ea
Cl
R
ke
W Beres Rd
D
ge
rt id
es
W
d
S
ll R
a
Sm
W
Sm
d
oo
y
Pk
Dr
Crimson Ln
W Howard Ave
Rd
N
RA
SA
James St
W Graham St
W Dakota St
W Maylo
WD
Service Rd
N Ivy
W Clinton Ave
St
W Win
field A
v
W Ruby Ave
TO
ish
WF
Tulane St
W Honey Ln
W Crestview
r Ln
Te
r
arine
Dr
W Marcia Rd
W Rohr Ave
Tremont St
W Beechwood Trl
unt
e
e rw
nd
# N OY
W Dixon St
W Forest Dr
W Rogers Dr
W Beloit Rd
W Prospect Pl
W Kostner Ln
W Maple Ridge Rd
SH
ltop D
W Hil
James St
Dr Dover Hill Ln
Dr
Knoll Rd
MN-14A
ofs
Eg
S Martin Rd
Ct
Dr
Oakwood
a Dr
MN-14
Myrtle Ave
Ave
West Grove Ter
e
Av
ll
Mi
Highland D
look
Rd
Virginia Ave
W Hillcrest Dr
Ove
r
ee
Golf Pky
S 149th St
st
W Mount Vernon Ave
by
im
Qu
re
illc
rt Dr
Froedte
S Parkside Dr
Dr
W Salentine Dr
W Lawnsdale Rd
Rd
n Plank
Watertow
k Trl
W Barton Rd
ss
y Ro
S Longview Dr
ree
Mill C
iew
Ko
llv
t
hl
Hi
le C
er
a
d
s
Ct
n
ale Rd
Lawnsd
w
a
L
Dr
W Clarke St
ber
t
elen
aC
W Hadley St
W Center St
Gil
Le
on
W Ka
Gremoor Dr
Walnut Rd
Elmhurst Pky
W Harcove Dr
W
W Chipmunk Ln
ar
WM
Dr
k
ar
de
R
Juneau Blvd
Madera
Ci
Cir
rc
le
S 152nd St
Dr
W Observatory Rd
ivier
WD
W Harvest Ln
MN-17
Lee Ct Laurel
Ln
Wraybur n Rd
Dunwoody Dr
Brook Ave
Nicolet Ave
W San Mateo Dr
lm
SE
WR
Hil
k
Oa
W Sheridan Ave
W Townsend St
l Ln
Victoria Cir
Dr
view
Wood
ta St
S 166th St
Ln
e
in
ac
W Coffee Rd
Dr
R
S Willow R
eh
W
Tr
m
El
y Ln
E Rockwa
Rd
W Ryerson
Victor Rd
Hi
lls
i
Rd
Robin
W Glendale Dr
W Dako
Club Dr
W Ridge Rd
W Rogers Dr
Brittany Dr
Ct
d
Westover Rd
Woodlawn Cir
Hackberry Ln
S 162nd St
W Lincoln Ave
d
rR
uer Dr
Kevena
W Rogers Dr
W We
st Ln
S Carriage Ln
Roosevelt Ave
Kirby St
##
dg
e
W Daphne S
t
W Jon
en St
W Keefe Ave
Forestview Ln
Ri
W Vera Ave
W Feerick St
Waynescott Rd
Carpenter Rd
C
urst
Burnet St
h
Pine
Tremont St
Sunnyview Ln
ills Dr
Judith Ln
Hope St
WH
W Bobolink Ave
W Peck Pl
ts Dr
Lindsay Dr
Hidden H
arie Ct
Jean M
Dr
Ln
Brook Ln
Fronta
ge Rd
Golf Pky
Heigh
W Lilly
W Dogwood St
W Juniper St
Ruby Ave
W Florist Ave
W Colfax Pl
Ave
W Portage St
MN-12#
WM
d
k R W Cloverleaf Ln
W Tower Ave
W Greenwood Ter
W Kaul Ave
W Eggert Pl
W Stark St
#
#
n St
Service Rd
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
#
*
W Sunnydale Ln
Donges Bay Rd
Le Grande Blvd
W Hiawatha Dr
Plant Community
Floristic Quality Index (FQI)
W Liebau Rd
W Haven Ave
W Elmdale Rd
W Willow Rd
W Donges Ln
o
nbro
W Mulberry Dr
W Kathleen Ln
le
WG
Freistadt Rd
W Westfield Rd
W Lilly Ln
W Fountain Ave
W Metro Bd
se
Es
r
xD
Dr
fD
ol
Isl
a
Scenic Ave
W Pine Ln
W County Line Rd
W Darnell Ave
W Calumet Rd
Mill Rd
W Villa Ave
W Lake Park Dr
W Wirth St
ily
an
nD
r
Kat Dr
aD
r
Ruby Ln
Daylily Dr
Hampton Ave
Kin
g
Br
oj
Lillian Rd
Ct
Ma
r
Ct
Deerpark
D
rry
MN-13
Ave
W Wisconsin
t
urt S
Beeheim Rd
Luella
Dr
Ter
Leon
W Norwood Dr
rs
ffe
Je
Tansdale Rd
Rd
Shagbark Ln w
Vie
dow
Mea
W Pinecrest Ln
W Southview Ln
Patricia Ln
Quinn Rd
Evergree
n
Patti Ln
S Heide
S Hanke Dr
D
nd
dla
o
o
W
Sunridge Dr
Patricia Ln
Ranch Rd
W Ally
rne Ct
W Luce
W Heather
e
Terra Av
Fairmount Ave
W Bradley Rd
W Carmen Ave
Thurston Ave
Carmen Ave
W Silver Spring Rd
Silver Spring Dr
Lancaster Ave
W Burleigh Blvd
r
ia D
Mar
a
t
n
Sa
Pomona Rd
MN-13A
r
ood D
Ln
ve
eA
r
st
W
ay
l Ln
d Hil
Woodsid
e
y
Wa
orn e Ln
h
t
Bay ourn
b
Ash
Edmonton Ln
S Nor w
Dr
rd
Wexfo
Rempe Dr
cin
Ra
Pe
nh
ur
Crestview Dr
e Ln
Foxkirk Dr
Ave
E Broadway St
Hinsdale Rd
idg
Partr
Follett Dr
Stonehedge Dr
Davidson Rd
W Downie Rd
W Co
Dr
igan
Harr n Ct
le
Cul
Emerald Dr
urn
Aub
idge
Sultan St
164
Harris Dr
County Highway I
Briar Ridge Dr
r
Dr a Te
ll
Vi
Dr
ay
State Highw
Perkins Ave
N Greenfield Ave
Pearl St
Ellis St
n
Lege
Wisconsin Ave
Goetz Dr
tD
Sunse
Meadow View
nbe
Tur
Dr
Mayer Ln
Brentwood Dr
MN-11
W Heather Ave
Nicolet Ct
Stanford C
t
State Highway 100
NS
th
14
5
State Highway 190

Newell Dr
Hyland Dr
Brookhill Dr
Av
e
Woodland Pl
Vernon Dr
L
Siesta
Civic Dr
W Corporate Dr
Hi R
dale
D
R
d
8
1
y
wa Swenson
Dr
igh
it
Summ
Nike
r
Manhattan D
Gree
n
Harvest Ln
Ln
nie
Bon
k Dr
arac
Tam
Timberline Dr
ok
Bro
Hunters Run
Kossow Rd
ate
St
d
ite
Un
Du
blin
Gebhardt Rd
Black Forest Dr
Ac
c
W Bluemound Rd ess
sH
on D
ingt
Ben
Brian Dr
l Dr
Ln
hon
Bre
Cedar Dr
n Rd
Ct
Warwick Dr
Larkspur Dr
kD
Par
l Rd
Anoka Ave
Blackhawk Trl
y Ln
Ho
P
lly heas
an
Ln
t
Pky
Alta Louise
Dora
State Highway 59
Jills Dr
il
erh
Ov
Dr
tha
Mar
Surrey Ln
Tanala Dr
Independence Dr
Highland Pass
Dover Dr
Kodiak Trl
W North Ave
Killarney Way
Marcus Dr
Wolf Rd
Cardinal Dr
nd Ave
Clevela
Arcadian Ave
ty
er
Lib
Ruben Dr
Coral Dr
ak Ln
Lone O
County Highway K
Eldorado Dr
Brooklawn Dr
Bolter Ln
MN-8
La
c
17
5
n
Jerry L
Invery Dr
Honeysuckle Ln
t Ln
Burleigh Pl
Helene Dr
Enterprise Ave
Sierra D
Indian Trl
Red Fox Dr
nD
yn
yL
Maraljo Dr
Alta Vista Dr
k Ln
Belgren Rd
t
in S
Ma
Pl
gham
Buckin
Woodch
uc
I-94
r
ust D
Stard
re s
Dane Ct
Countr
El Rio Dr
du
ay
Vera Ln
Fair Oak Pky
eC
Hoffman Ave
w Dr
Midland Pl
Ann Rita Dr
Astolat Dr
Coventry Dr
r
Ma
Saratoga Rd
Dr
Rivervie
Brookdale Dr
n Dr
Tennyso
Jericho Dr
Mountain Dr
Bar
tlett
ld Ln
Wynfie
St
Rd
Ln
ry
er
ul
Pa
Ave
Almesbury
n
n
tL
ood L
on
km
a
O
d Ln
o
o
w
Glen
gw
Burnin
Bluem
ound
R
River Rd
rb
Ba
Kathryn Ct
Johns
o
Xing
wood
Creek
Wilderness Way
Ln
Dr
Estate Cir
Burleigh Rd
Green Rd
Joseph Rd
Cir
Rd
ra
Ventu
ay
Gatew
Ln
Sh
ad
yL
D
Intertech
Pa
ris
h
Ln
Arroyo Rd
ky
Richland P
d
ina R
Gum
Beaufort Dr
d
Rd
Abb
ey
Scott
Ln
Redvere Dr
Ridgeview Dr
Primrose Ln
Lisa Ln
Dr
sa
Me
Whitetail Run
Azure Ln
Dr
ille R
Cherokee
lainv
Dup
Danbur y Dr
Ln
Wessex Dr
Rd
t
rs e
me
o
S
ood Dr
County Highway VV
Dr
tta
Joe
Ashford Ln
l
Kendel P
Dr
Wood
Ridge
Ma
pl
Dr
Verde Ln
er R
d
e Dr
Bette Dr
D
rta
be
Ro
sha
Wauke
Riv
Glacier Pky
n
ta
Ti
Ct
Hi Tech Dr
Aster Dr
Vir ginia Ln
M
em
or
Ridgew
gh
w
Brookside D
r
Wigwam Dr
e
v
A
l
au
Boboli K
nk Av
e
Kohler Ln
Ln
ce
Spru
Hi
Rd
Fo
nd
W Donges Bay Rd
W County Line Rd
W Donna Dr
Prudence Dr
Claremore Cir
r
nD
r
nD
ga
Lo
e Dr
Aspen Dr
ge
Rid
Dr
Lon
Av
e
Eileen Ave
Kathrn Ave
thorn
Le
on
St
at
e
MN-7
Carol Dr
Meadowood
Terra
c
Haw
y
alle
gV
Roundy Dr
Ra
cin
r Dr
Antle
Fawn Ave
Mill Rd
clyn
Ma
Ct
Roundy Cir Marjean
Stonewood Dr
Edelweiss Ln
Skyline Dr
Weyer Rd
nR
St
Titan Dr
Cedar Ridge
Fairview Dr
s Pky
Lindsay Rd
Wa
ter
tow
r
Colony Rd
Sunny D
ale
Bonnie Ln
Be
av
er
74
Rainbow Dr
Sherwood
D
Beac
on
Northwood Dr
WF
ores
t Vie
w Av
Robinhood Dr
Bonnie Ln
State Highway 100
Woodland Dr
Dr
W Good Hope Rd
Willow Ln
Saint
Jame
Narrow Ln
Davies Ct
ilton
y
nc
Na
at
St
ood
D
Hemlock Ln
State St
eH
Patrita Dr
Albert Pl
Ham
WE
dgew
ay
County Line Rd
Warren St
p Dr
Hillto
Chestnut Hill Rd
Valley View Dr
Forest Hill Ln
Wooded Hills Dr
Plainview Dr
Way
##
MN-9
Brad
ley
County Line Rd
dW
ay
Tamarack Tr
Custer Ln
w
igh
eD
t
Mill S
Susan Pl
Sheridan Dr
Good Hope Rd
Dr
MN-6
Ave
Grand
Destiny Dr
Dubnicka D
14
5
Dr
ln
Linco
Un
ite
Forest Dr
dS
tat
St R
es
egis
Ln
l
Laure
Hi g
Dr
hw
ay
Roosevelt Dr
45
St Thom
Mar
a
s Dr
yhil
Cle
l Dr
vela
nd
Dr
Ave
ood
Elmw
Duke St
Blvd
Park
r
D
Christman Rd
Kings Hwy
ield
a rf
Dr
rd
e
G
h
p
e
h
S
y
luff Rd
B
Elder Ln
er Pk
Joss Pl
Riverside
e Riv
e
n
o
m
Meno
Tyler Dr
Ann Ave
Rd
e
Ridg
Seneca Dr
Tours Dr
St
Ri
ch
fie
l
ay
Mars C
t
Northway
School Rd
Concord Rd
Na
va
jo
ig
hw
Bel Air Ln
Ra
intr
e
Butternut Rd
D
Jay
Shady Ln
Menomonee Ave
ott
Sc
Santa Fe Dr
Donges Bay Rd
kD
17
5
tD
res
erc
Revere Ln
Riv
Scenic
D
Lyle Ln
ss
w
Pa oha
M
ne
sto
ay
e
Av
ld
Fie
gh
w
Ln
Hi
ir
Schlei Rd
N Lisbon Rd
Stoneridge Dr
C
nd
be
ers
hway Y
Old Farm Rd
ur
Lar ksp
Wildrose Ln
St
at
e
St
at
e
MN-5 Hedge Way

Whitetail Run
Riv
WI
O
LL
CREEK
Catskil
l Ln
nd
ge
e
L
er Dr
Junip
County Hig
ters
Hun
Hills
Trl
Hickory Dr
MN-4
Lilac Ln
Mequon Rd
r
View D
W Park
Trl
nn Dr
e
Av
Willow Creek Rd
Francese Dr
Ln
bury r
Ash
D
ne
or
h
wt
Ha
r
Poplar D
State Highway 167
n
Mequo
ma
Klien
41
on
et
pl
Ap
ass
Highland Dr
Pheasant Ln
W Holly Rd
N Whilton Rd
ay
P
ate
r
ore D
eg
Ston
S Sh
Mequon Rd
Sylvan Cir
W Sunnyvale Rd
N Brighton Pl
w
gh
Carnegie Dr
Hilbe
rt Ln
Elm Ln
ok
Riv
Grand Ave
E Freistadt Rd
W Riverland Dr
Washington Ct
Dr
w
Rivervie
e Ave
W Grac
Elm St
Grace Ave
Grace Ave
iew
Hi
Clinton Dr
Vicksburg Ave
Elm Ln
Rosedale Dr
Heidel Rd
v
ark
NP
Edison Dr
Main St
W Freistadt Rd
Field D
Cresent Ln
Ct
iew
gev
Rid
in St
Fulton Dr
Morse Dr
Williams Dr
Rolling
W Cairdel Ln
N Ma
es
at
St
ill L
n
Bunsen Dr Bunsen Dr
Country Aire Dr
d
ite
Un
Hilltop Cir
Mequon Rd
er
H
Freistadt Rd
Park Ave
75
ay 1
Bark Lake Ln
Me
ek
MN-10
W Ma
rseille
s Dr
Sh
W Madero Dr
er
br
o
N Lantern Ln
ighw
L
HA
T
K
N
DE CREE
L
GO
Lake Dr
Willow Gate Pass
Av
e
Highland Rd
Oakwood Dr
Lovers Ln
W Chapel Hill Rd
N Ridge Rd
Lovers Ln
MN-3
Stonefield Rd
du
La
c
Fo
nd
MN-2
Dellwood Dr
ee Dr
Highland Rd
Holy Hill Rd
W Bonniwell Rd
Hawthorne Farm Ln
Map 9
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR AND PLANT COMMUNITY CONDITIONS

WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
W Bonniwell Rd
Hawthorne Rd
Rockfield Rd
VE
eH
Stat
Hubertus Rd
State Highway 74
RI
Dand
Dr
Glacier
Bark Lake Rd
State Highway 167
EE
Rd
Skyline Dr
Plain View Rd
MEN
Rockfield Rd
N Granville Rd
MN-1
lf
Wo
Evergreen Ct
Bonniwell Rd
ON
W Rockfield Rd
Polk St
N ORTH
N CH
Industrial Rd
Woodside Ln
Bonniwell Rd
Pleasant Hill Rd
BRA
Cedar Ln
Lake Shore Dr
Cedar Ln
n
Shady L
County Highway W
Shadow Ln
Springside Ln
Pioneer Rd
n
itatio
EC
Way
E Norse Ave
Ln
N Northwood Ln
Lake Shore Dr
Willow Glen Ct
I-43
Ci r
NP
ine
hu
rs t
N Lake Dr
N Tennyson Dr
N Bayside Dr
at
er
Ln
N Poplar Dr
By
w
Dr
NB
ea
ch
N Boyd Way
N Santa Monica Blvd
N
Ba
rne Bel
t t L mo
n
nt
Ln
N Larkin St
N Ardmore Ave
N Prospect Ave
N Hackett Ave
N Maryland Ave
N Downer Ave
N Murray Ave
N Oakland Ave
N Woodburn St
N Farwell Ave
La
ke
D
N Cramer St
Av
e
mo
ria N Pr
lD
os
pe
r
ct
Me
oln
Lin
c
N
r
bor D
N Har
S 2nd St
E Norwich Ave
S 5th St
S 2nd St
S Ahmedi Ave
S W E Bolivar Ave
hit
na
ll A
ve
S Pennsylvania Ave
S Brust Ave
S Logan Ave
S Pine Ave
E Howard Ave
S Lenox St S Lenox
St
S Her m
an S t
S Taylor Ave
S Griffin Ave
S Austin St
S Brust Ave
State Highway 38
S 1st Pl
S 1st Pl
eA
ve
S 3rd St
5th 794
S 10th St
S 14th St
S 13th St
S 18th St
S 16th St
I-94
S 22nd St
S Ellen St
S Howell Ave
S 3rd St
S 5th St
S 15th St
S Clement Ave
S 7th St
S 5th Pl
S 17th St
S 21st St
S Burrell St
S 5th St
S 7th St
S 8th St
S 10th St
S 9th St
S 11th St
S 8th St
S 9th Pl
S 12th St
S 14th St
S 15th St
S 16th St
S 18th St
S 19th St
S 19th St
S 20th St
S 21st St
S 22nd Pl
S 23rd St
S 1st St
Access Rd
S 3rd St
S 8th St
ke
Av S 11th St
e
S 10th St
S 14th St
ind
la
W
S 15th St W
S 12th St
S 19th St S 19th St
S 4th St
S 6th St
S 29th St
N Yates Rd
N 2nd St
N James Lovell St
N 10th St
N 9th St
S 12th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 22nd St
S 24th St
S 25th St
S 27th St
S 31st St
ST
uck
aw
ay
Dr
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 25th St
S Mar
ilyn S
t
N Regent Rd
N Mohawk Rd
N 10th St
N 12th St
N 12th Ln
S 9th St
S 21st St
S 26th St
S 24th St
S Layton Blvd
S 29th St
S Point Ter
Ln
Somers
et
N Cambridge Ave
N 12th St
N 14th St
N 14th St
N 16th St
N 13th St
N 12th St
N 15th St
N 14th St
N 17th St
N 18th St
N 21st St
N 23rd St
Co
Mu
m
s
sk
eg tock S 19th St
oA
Av
e
S 17th St ve
S 28th St
S 30th St
S 32nd St
S 34th
St
S 33rd St
ay
3
S 35th St
N Bartlett Ave
N 13th St
N 15th St
N 15th Ln
N 23rd St
N 21st Ln
State Highway 57
N 24th Pl N 24th Pl
N 25th St
N 28th Pl
S 31st St
S 33rd St
S 34th St
S 37th St
gh
w
Hi
S 33rd St
S 42nd St
N Lake Shore Dr
N Navajo Rd
N Pheasant Ln
I-43
N Chadwick Rd
Tree R
d
N Elm
N 11th St
Ln
9th
N
N 9th S
N 9th St
t
N 8th St
Access Rd
N 7th St
N 6th St
St
6th
N
N 6th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N Mohawk Ave
N 4th St
N 4th St
N Navajo Ave
N 3rd St
N Lydell Ave
N
N 2nd St
N 2nd St
N Bay Ridge Ave
R
N
1st
St
iv
St
Lydell
N
N
1st
St
N 1st St
N Kent Ave
er
N Achilles St
ce
N Shoreland Ave
N Palmer St
N Hubbard St
nt
er
N Richards St
N Berkeley Blvd
D
N Buffum St
r
N Diversey Blvd
N Holton St
N Booth St
N Jackson St
N Idlewild Ave
N Pierce St
N Fratney St
N Cass St
N Bremen St
N Weil St
N Marlborough Dr
N Humboldt Blvd

N Sunny Point Rd
N Glen Park Rd
N 17th St
N 16th St
N 19th St
N 18th St
N 21st St
N 23rd St
N 24th Pl
N 26th St
N 26th St
N 28th St
N 31st St
N 30th St
N 31st St
S 32nd St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
Sta
te
S 39th S
t
S 37th St
S 40th St
S 43rd St
S 44th St
N Pheasant Ln
N Skyline Ln
N River Rd
Dr
N 21st St
N 20th St
N 22nd St
N 22nd St
N 24th St
N 23rd St
N 24th Pl
N 25th St
N 26th St
N 27th St
N 29th St
N 33rd St
N 34th St
N 36th St

N 38th St
N 37th Pl
N 37th St
N 35th St
N 34th St
S 40th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
S 37th St
S 40th St
S 42nd St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 40th St
S 46th St
S 48th St
46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St
Grasslyn Rd
ide
N 24th St
N 24th St
N 25th St
N 29th St
N 28th St
N 37th St
N 38th St
N Baker Rd
N Flint Rd
N Bethmauer Ln
N 27th St
N 32nd St
N 33rd St
N 35th St
N 39th St
N 39th St
N 40th St
N 41st St
Miller Park Way
S 44th St
S 43rd St
S 47th St
S 47th St
S 47th St
S 45th St
S 50th St S 50th St
N Crestwood Dr
N Braeburn Ln
N Bethmaur Ln
N Seville Ave
N 35th St
N 37th St
N 34th St N 34th St
N 36th St
N 38th St
N 39th St
N 40th St
N 41st St
N 42nd Pl
N 42nd St
N 44th St
S 47th St
S 49th St
S 51st St
S 51st St
S 52nd St
Beechwood Dr
Stratford Pl
N Dean Ct
N Range Line Rd
N 41st St
N 40th St
N 40th St
N 42nd St
N 41st St
N 42nd Pl
N Sherman Blvd
N 44th St
N Sherman Blvd
N Grant Blvd
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 47th St
d
Access
R
N 50th Pl N 50th Pl
N
Alo
is
St
S 52nd St
y
Eas
twa
S 51st St
Mulberry Dr
Dr
field
N Pebble Ln
N San Marino Dr
N Spruce Rd
N Valley Hill Rd
Upper River Ct
Lakewoo
dD
Lake Shore Dr
Oriole Ln
N Oriole Ln
lac L
Charter M
al
N Range Line Rd
Valley Hill Dr
N Upper River Rd
er Ct
N Kilde
NW
ay
s
Service Rd
N 44th St
N 46th St
N 46th St N 46th S
t
N 44th St
N 48th St
N 48th St
N 50th St
N 51st St
S 53rd St
S 53rd St
S 55th St
S 60th St
S 53rd St
S 52nd St
S 57th St
rd S
t
S 63
S 62nd St
S 64th St
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 44th St
N 47th St
N 49th St
N 48th St
N 50th St
N 48th St
N 49th St
N 52nd St
N 53rd St
S 54th St
S 56th St
S 57th St
S 58th St
d
WP
ark R
St
St
Man
s
S 6th St
N 51st Blvd N Link Pl

N 52nd St
N 51st Blvd
N 53rd St
N 55th St
N 54th St
N 55th St
ley Rd
N Haw
Rd
S 58th St
S 59th St
S 62nd St
S 65th St
S 64th
S 65th
S 65th St
Broad St
NP
elic
an
L
N 49th St
N 47th St
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 44th St
N 51st St
N 53rd St
N Highview Dr
N Presidio Dr
N 54th St
N 56th St
N 56th St
N 57th St
N 59th St
N 61st St
S 61st St
S Ha
wley
S 62nd St
S 64th St
S 66th St
S 67th Pl
S 67th St
S 67th St
S 68th St
S 69th St
N Li
Riverland Rd
Justin Dr
N Canterbury Dr
N River Rd
N Arbon Dr
N 55th St
N 55th St
N 57th St
N 56th St
N 55th St
N 58th St
N 58th St
N 57th St
N 60th St
N 58th Blvd
N 62nd St
N 63rd St
N 66th St
S 64th St
S 70th St
Pl
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 71st St
S 70th St
N River Bend Ct
N Riebs Ln
N 59th St
N 59th St
N 58th St
N 64th St
ir
Washington
C
S 71st St
St
ut
h
Ex
We eter St
stw
ay
Apri
cot C
t
Azale
a Ct
N Fieldwood Rd
N Madero Dr
r Austin Ave
N Countr
N Le Mont Blvd
Baehr Rd
N Bethanne Dr
N 62nd St
N 60th St
N 60th St
N 62nd St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 63rd St
N 65th St
N 66th St
N 68th St
NS
hole
s Av
N 65th St N
e
Car
lton
P
l
N 63rd St
N 61st St
N 61st St
N 67th St
St
S 72nd St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 75th St
S 72nd St
S 77th St
S 75th St
S 74th St
S 79th St
Gazebo Hill Pky
Industrial Dr
ura L
n
N Ma
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 64th St
N 68th St
N 67th St
N 67th St
N 69th St
N 69th St
N 70th St
N 71st St
N Lefeber Ave
N 73rd St
N 72nd St
S 76th St
S 79th St
S 80th St
S 82nd St
S 81st St
y View D
N Eastgate Dr
S Main St
S Orchard St
N Buntrock Ave
N Enterprise Dr
N 66th St
N 66th St
N 66th St
N 69th St
N 71st St
N 74th St
N 75th St
N 78th St
S 77th St
S 80th St
S 82nd St
S 81st St
S 80th St
S 78th St
S 91st Pl
N7
4th
Day Ct
ey Cre
ek Pky
N 79th St
N Hon
S 82nd St
S 83rd St
S 86th St
Av
e
Bu
rd
ick
S 84th St
S 72nd St
S 90th St
S 92nd St
S 93rd St
ie L
n
SB
onn
S 106th St
St
at S 104th St
e
H
ig
hw
ay
24
N 68th St
N 72nd St
N Swallow Ln
N 71st St
N 73rd St
N 74th S
t
N 75th St
State Highway 181

N 77th St
N 80th St
N 83rd St
g Ave
Elm Spri
n
S 88th St
S 88th St
S 91st St
S 93rd St
S 93rd St
S 93rd St
S 94th St
S 96th St
S 97th St
S 101st St
N 78th St
N 79th St
N 82nd St
N 84th St
N 85th St
N 85th St
N 89th St
S 90th St
S 94th Pl
S 93rd St
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 98th St
S 100th St
S 103rd St
S 104th St
S 89th St
S 91st St
S 97th St
S 96th St
S 100th St
S 99th St
S 110th St
S 110th St
N 76th Pl
N 77th St
N 80th St
N 79th St
N 83rd St
N 81st St
N 83rd St
N 82nd St
N 81st St
N 86th St
N 88th St
N 89th St
N 88th St N 87th S
t
N 90th St
N Swan Blvd
N 95th St
Rd
Ac
ce
ss
I-894
S 101st St
S 102nd St
S 105th St
S 107th St
State Highway 100
S 112th St
N 73rd St
N 80th St
N 78th
St
81
st
St
N 86th St
N 87th St
N 90th St
N 89th St
N 87th
St
N 91st St
N 90th St
N 91st St
N 89th St
N 91st St
N 102nd St
S 103rd St
S 109th St
S 111th St
S 112th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
N Birc
Riverland Rd
d
Gre
en B
ay R
w Ct
W Rid
gevie
r
water D
Solar Ave
N Silver Ave
Vega Ave
Av
e
ce
Jo
y
N 86th S
t
N Faulkner Rd
E
N 92nd St
N 94th St
N 94th St
N 95th St
N 94th St
N 97th Pl
Co
lo
ni
al
D
N
N Mayfair Rd
N 110th Pl
S 111th St
S 113th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
St
S 118th
S 122
nd St
S 122nd St
N 96th St
N 96th St
EK
N 112th St
S 115th St
S 116th St
S 117th St
S 124th St
hwood
Cedarburg Rd
Hillside Dr
N Windsor Ct
ER
RIV
N Swan Rd
N 95th St
TL
LIT
Dr
anor
N Pa
rk M
N 99th St
N 99th St
N 103rd St
N 101st St
N 100th St
RE
C
N 99th St
N 111th St
N Kn
oll Blv
d
N 105th St
N 119th St
N 113th St
N 115th St
N 124th St
Longwood Ave
S 124th St
S 130th St
Dr
poin
te
High
St
N 96th
N 99th St
N 104th St
N 102nd St
N 106th St
N 105th St
N 106th St
N 108th St
N 110th St

N 117th S
t
N Park Dr
Sheraton Rd
SW
ilso
nD
S 132nd St
S 128th St
S 127th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S Nicolet Dr
Oakbrook Dr
S Elm Grove Rd
S 134th St
Loftus Ln
Concord Dr
Foxk
irk
Dr
ME N OM O
N 107th St
N 109th St
N 112th St
N Lovers Lane Rd
N 118th St
N 119th St
N 124th St
N 126th St
Burlawn Pky
Mayfair Dr
N 131st St
N 122nd St
Old Lantern Dr
S 115th St
S 92nd St
t
hS
N 116th St
N 119th St
N 118th St
Park Dr
N 125th St
N 128th St
N 127th St
N 135th St
N 134th St
N Fiebrantz Dr
Parkside Dr
Wauwatosa Rd
Pioneer Dr
NE
E
N Granville Rd
CR
Alquran Ct
N1
15
T
N 115th St
N 124th St
r
Parkwa
yD
River Dr
Marach Rd
S Sunny Slope Rd
t Ct
Silver M
is
S Meadowmere Pky
S Li
lac L
n
S Glen Par
k Rd
Ash Ct
S Sunnyslope Rd
S Small Rd
EE
RK
PA
A
Claas Rd
Campbell Dr
CH
BUTLER
DIT
Stone Dr
N 144th St
San Juan Trl
Sauk Trl
S Fairlane Ave
S Brookland Rd
t
S 145th St
S Manor Dr
Av
e
at
io
na
l
N
N Farmdale Rd
LIT TLE
Dr
N Council Hills
124th St
TZK
DRE
N 124th St
Dr
iew
Pa
rk v
Lilly Rd
Oak Ln
LY
LIL
Dolphin Dr
Highland Dr
S Wildwoo
S Ronke Ct
S James Dr
S Moorland Rd
W
S Delphine Dr
N Bridge
N Briarhill Rd
CREEK
N Granville Rd
ON E
E
OM
MEN
Wasaukee Rd
AN
Lilly Rd
r
Melville
D
CREEK
Ash Dr
r
D
N 149th St
N 148th St
N 147th St
Lone Tree Rd
Woodland Ave
Vist
aV
iew
d Dr
Dr
Ter
way
S 159th St
S Town Road
S Casper Dr
CH
Fond du Lac Ave
Amber Dr
Woodview Dr
M
in
eo
la
r
Badge
rD
Pilgrim Pky
Service Dr
N Moorland Rd
DOUSM AN DIT CH
Melody Ln
S 170th St
S 171st St
Rd
SW
illia
ms
N OR-XWAY
Henry Stark Rd
Held Dr
Norman Dr
Sylvan Ln
Dr
lin
Frank
Northpoint
Dr
Honey Ln
Northwood Dr
Ox
for
dS
t
Oakwood Dr
Ln
Elm
Countryside Dr
Pheasant Ln
Pilgrim Rd
Cullen Dr
t
od Dr
S Executive Dr
S Forest Ln
S 167th St
S 169th St
S 171st St
S West Ln
S 179 St
Gre
en
7th
S
Bradee Rd
Churchview Dr
N 166th St
Indianw
o
Hillsdale Dr
Norhardt Dr
Mierow Ln
Patrick Blvd
S Michael Dr
Talon Trl
S Woefel Rd
S 14
N 167th St
N 169th St
N 161st St
N 159th St
N 158th St
N 162nd St
N 160th St
Greenview Ave
Penn Ct
N Calhoun Rd
Sm
ith C
Woelfel Rd
Fiserv Dr
Wasaukee Rd
NE
L
Preserve Pky
Pilgrim Rd
Neptune Dr
Colonial Dr
Water St
Arthur Ave
Mary Ct
Shady Ln
Trl
Oak Ridg
e
Evelyn Ter
Lincrest Dr
r
sau
D
Nas
Le Ch
a
Coach H
teau
Dr
ouse Dr
S Calhoun Rd
S Cari Ada
m Dr
S Acredale Rd
Marcy Rd
Imperial Dr
Shasta Dr
Bexley Dr
Tilton Ln
d
R
Eg
an
SR
SC
S Stigler Rd
oun
tr
olli
ng
D
y Ln
S Johnson Rd
S Racine Ave
S Brennan Dr
S Andrae Dr
Squire Dr
Wagon Trl
Shady Ln
Allen Ave
Robert Ave
Wildwood Dr
Wilson
Dr
Town Hall Rd
Dr
son
Jac
k
N Brookfield Rd
Elizabeth Ct
N Janacek Rd
S Danny Rd
S Swartz Rd
Western Ave
Dr
Joper
R
Bancroft Dr
Pre
mie
r Ln
To
we
rR
d
Marcy Rd
Clover Ln
Derrin Ln
Poplar Creek Dr
Catskill Rd
S Barker Rd
Sunnycrest Dr
Copenhill Rd
S Amor Dr
S Shady Ln
S 200th St
S 199th St
ar
E St Francis Ave
S Iowa Ave
W Iona Ter
1
ay 1
S Arctic Ave
Stat
ghw
e Hi
S 7th St
t
nd S
Dr
S 22
reek
wa
st
Ea
W Goldcrest Ave
W Denis Ave
S 9th St
ney C
S Ho
Ter
W Parnell Ave
W Mallory Ave
De
law
ve
cA
nni
icki
inn
Ave
SK
eld
ayfi
SD t
S
llen
SE
W Vogel Ave
E Car ol St
E Layton Ave
W Halsey Ave
Sh
or
e
St
W Armour Ave W Armour Ave
r
rio
pe
Su
E Plainfield Ave
S Herman St
S 5th St
E Waterford Ave
W Martin Ln
S Springdale Rd
y St
W Norwich St
W Water ford Ave
S Ba
Rd
Park
S 4th St
E Holt Ave
E Morgan Ave
E Wilbur Ave
Iro
t
nS
E Idaho St
E Ohio Ave
W Tripoli Ave
S 7th St
W Holmes Ave
W Saveland Ave
St
W Barnard Ave
ve
Ave ell A
ter
s
t
s
o
u
EP
ER
E Euclid Ave
W Holt Ave
W Howard Ave
W Colony Dr
E Homer St
E Gauer Cir
E Oklahoma Ave
th
14
W Bottsford Ave
E Lincoln Ave
E Linus St
Ct
W Warnimont Ave
W Holt Ave
St
E Montana St
E Dakota St
S 5th
W Holt Ave
d
ar
W
Dr
S 5th Pl
W Euclid Ave
St
E Stewart
E Bay St
p
Ra m
W Arthur Ave
S Valley Ln
W Becher St
r
arbo
SH
Dr
W Rogers St
W Montana St
S 21st St
ook
ay
S Edinbourgh Dr
W Maple St
W Cleveland Ave
es St
4
I-79
Pioneer Trl
Dr
E Linnwood Ave
W Lapham St
I- 43
st
re
Fo
m
Ho
ve
eA
E Jon
rferry
S Ca
Cherokee
Forest Dr
Kurt Dr
yne
D
Bisc
a
Division Rd
Nigbor
Orchard Dr
Maple Rd
N Willow Ln
One Mile Rd
N Barker Rd
Jaclyn Dr
Rd
Ch
ea
ne
y
E Hartford Ave
St
rie
EE
t
rS
ate
SW
Misty Ln
N 5th St
Ava
lo
Ram n Dr
ona
Rd
N Astor St
E Wells St
t
N Water S
N Plankinton Ave
W Kilbourn Ave
W Wells St
ren St
N Van Bu
t
E State S
W Elgin Ln
W Madison St
W Greenfield Ave
W Bolivar Ave
S 36th St
r
enb
Gre
Forest Ave
Fawn Ln
Woodside Ln
Well
ingto
n Dr
Lannon Rd
N Lannon Rd
Martha Ln
Springdale Rd
Elmwood Dr
N Marshall St
St
Park Fwy E Knapp
N 7th St
Whitehall St
St
St
St
E Capitol Dr
E North Ave
E
E Garfield Ave
W
oo
E Lloyd St
ds
t
S
toc
E Brown St
e E Kane Pl
c
kP
r
e
l
m
m
E Hamilton St
Co
N
E Brady St
W Vine St
Hill
E Jarvis St
E Park Pl
E Belleview Pl
E Webster Pl
E Meinecke Ave
W Brown St
o ry
WT
E Olive St
E Kenwood Blvd
E Wright St
rd
St
vd
E Lake Bluff Bl
E Locust St
S 15th Pl
t
th S
Dr
Churchw
Guthrie Dr
Knollwood Dr
R
VE
RI
r
EE
ON
Stonewood Dr
ay
gh
w
Hi
St
at
e
Rd
La
nn
on
Lannon Rd
Town Line Rd
Catherine Ct
Dr
view
Ln
E Chambers St
e
W Gar field Av
S 18th St
Foxcroft Ln
Mary Buth Ln
County Highway G
Lan
cel
ot D
River Ln
OM
EN
M
16
7
Hilltop Dr
r
ies
D
Dav
Dr
Villag
e
Lynwood Dr
We
st
oo
d
N Fox Hollow Rd
Scott Ln
McCormick Dr
Merkel Dr
Shadow Wood Dr
Fox Ln
Ln
Sp
ri n
gh
ill
Ln
Oa
k
Whitehorse Dr
Town Line Rd
Elmwood Rd
Tamarack Rd
F
Longv riess Pl
iew R
d
Sussex Rd
Pleasant View Dr
Maple Rd
Goldendale Rd
N Town Line Rd
Amy Belle Rd
Amy Belle Ln
Colgate Rd
Colgate Rd
N Davis Rd
Country Aire Dr
Rocky Ln
Robinhood Dr
S Mayfield Rd
Oak Dr
ir
Jordan
C
Short Rd
Fo
xw
N Gordon Pl
W Burleigh St
N 9th
Ave
N Morris Blvd
Pl
rn
bu
W Ring St
lya
Ha
oe
W Orchard St
S 24th St
Ct
E Glendale Ave
E Kensington Blvd
er
Sh
Ln
xe
Pky
No
rth
elu
32
WD
St
on
r
y
wa
gh
Hi
e
at
St
Rd
es
ad N Newhall St
Es
tab E Hampton Ave
roo
kP
ky
E Chicago St
S 23rd St
S 38
id
ac
Pl
S 49th St
Concord
lis
Pa
E Henry Clay St
Wilhar Rd
E Circle Dr
Tre
e
E Birch Ave
Lon
e
E Silver Spring Dr
ns
ki
op
Jennifer Ln
E Day Ave
E Lake View Ave
nD
ilso
NW
Butler Dr
E Belle Ave
E Keefe Ave
S 44th St
S 45th St
th Pl
S 46th St
r
an D
othm
S Str
S 50
S 61st St
Milky Way Rd
Rd
gacre
N Lon
d
rd y R
mba
State Highway 74
Ln
E Daisy Ln
N Lo
EW
ye
N Park Rd
N 18th St
t
th S
N 19
N 19th Pl
St
Gree
nbria
rR
Dr
d Rd
irchil
Rd
r
N Ironwood Rd
N 19th Pl
ns
ki
op
St
Pl
64
N Point
N Fa
ss
Acce
let Rd
n Nico
N Jea
N Ironwood Ln
l
il P
N 21st St
wa
y1
Ln
Cir
E Hyde Way
W Locust St
W Plainfield Ave
W Ramsey Ave
N Club
School Rd
ton A
ve
W Mineral St
St
E Good
rich Ln
E Bradley Rd
W Galena St
W Galena St
W Cherry St
W Vliet St
W Vliet St
D
ver Pky way
W Kinnickinnic Ri
rk
a
P
W Edgerton Ave
Seton Pl
amp
W Columbia St
oe
M
W Harrison Ave
W Cold Spring Rd
N Pelham Pky
r
no
Ma
Ne
ve
rA
W
W
W Hayes Ave
Po
e
n
E Fox L

Access Rd
W Melvina St
W Abert Pl
W Abert Pl
W Wright St
W Arthur Ave
SOUTH MEN OMON EE

W Florida St
MN-19 CAN AL
W Bruce St
BURN HAM
E National Ave
CAN AL
W Grant St
Dr
E Willow R
E Acacia Rd
W Canal St
W Pierce St
W Burnham St
W Tesch Ave
lvd
aB
nic
Mo
Dr
ly anta
er
av N S
W
N Iroquois Rd
Ln
te
ex
r
on
c
ar
on
eve
E Buttles Pl
E Dean Rd
t
sS
W Van Beck Ave
WH
W St Paul Ave
Gr
E Fairmount Ave
W Olive St
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
W Mount Vernon Ave
R
oint
E Chateau Pl
W Mc Kinley Blvd
W Juneau Ave
W Highland Ave
W Highland Blvd
W State St
W Scott St
yP
E Ba
W Dean Rd
W Silver Spring Dr
W Birch A
ve
W Lawn Ave
W Garfield Ave
Sa
rno
w
D
ke
La
ia D
ant
W Berg
e n Dr
iew D
W Riverv
e
e Av
Sall
W la
W Clarke St
W Meinecke Ave
W Lloyd St
W Brown St
W Vine St
land Dr
N Court
o
equ
NS
s
hea
NP
Wooded Ridge Trl
Dr
e
Av
iew
Rd
v
g
N Pierron
e
on
Av
NL
ra
rda
NA
N Neil Pl
Av
e
W Keefe Ave
W Clarke St
W Tripoli Ave
Dr
W Abbott Ave
ar
ne
e Ln
E Ellsworth Ln
W Glen River Rd
W Bender Rd
W Chambers St
W Center St
W Manitoba St
Dr
e D
e Av N
W Chambers St
Pl
W Leroy Ave
Dr
N Pine Shore
l Dr
N Atwah
rgyl
NA
N 31st St
St
ins
pk
Ho
St
W
al
t re
on
M
W Burleigh St
W Dakota St
r
Shore D
y Pl
N 38th Pl
W Concordia Ave
W Montana St
D
nd
W Hope Ave
W Auer Ave
M
n
E Ravin
E Fairy Chasm Rd
W Courtland Ave
St
W
W Glendale Ave
At
kin
so
n A W Ruby Ave
ve
W Cornell St
W Congress St
W Keefe Ave
W Townsend St
S 52nd St
Je
re
ly
E Ravin
W Fairfield Ct
WP
urd
ue
W Nash St
t
N 50th S
EE
N Glen
idne
NS
Waukesha Ave
Dr
okdale
ir
nia Ave 32nd St
N
N Teuto
W Cameron Ave
W Hadley St
Dr E Juniper Ct
E Juniper
Ln
1 Miles
W Acacia Rd
W Lancaster Ave
W Ruby Ave
an Dr
Sherid
N Spruce Ln
resta
N Bro
N Greenview Dr
N la C
e Ci r
Ln
an C
N De
N 37th St
N 38th St
urg Rd
Rd
W Bender Rd
St W Walnut St
W Galena St
W Cherry St
n
dly
oo
W
0.5
W Larkspur Ln
W Heather Ln
W Villard Ave
W Glendale Ave
Dr
Ln
D
olia
e Tre
W Miller Dr
e Baye Rd
Source: SEWRPC.
n
ar L
Ce d
W Dean Rd
W Stark St
tin
ar
N Shorecliff
stone Pl
N Haddon
agn
NM
N Pin
Trillium Rd
Aster Ln
W Zedler Ln
W el Rancho Dr0
W Hemlock
W Elm St
W Kiehnau Ave
t
ns S
opki
Lori Ln
tr y Ln
N Coun
N Valley Dr
N Grasslyn Rd
W Fiesta Ln
W Woodbury Ln
NH
N Hi Mount Blvd
igh
y
Pk
lighter
N Cedarb
N 50th St
N 54th St
Sta
te H
N Lamp
d
Fairfield R
Ct
side
adow
N Me
Service Rd
N 53rd St
Highland Ave
n
ela
St James Ln
N 51st St
S 56th St
S 61st St
la
Mid
W Park
y
rle
Mo
Northway
Bobolink Ln
5
ay
N 54th St
S 61st St
Seitz
Dr
Ca Downing Dr
m
va
lin
lie
g
rD
Ln
r
or
Sh
Mulberry Dr
hw
Hi g
N 54th Blvd
60th St
G
ra
dD
elan
N Fairway Ln
te
Sta
N 55th Pl
5
14
N 58th St
Parkview Rd
N Colony D r
hor
WS
N River Rd
N River Trail Rd
Dr
ay
Greenhill Ln
hw
ig
Dr
S 66th St
iew
Mequon Rd
Undefined
(Generally discharge areas)
W Kenboern Dr
e St
eyenn
Fil
lm
ore
W Cleveland Ave
W Waterford Ave
Greenway
Pky
W
W Rita Dr
W
W Norwich Ave
el Ave
W Vog
W Ch
ve
cA
ctri
e
l
E
St
rial Cir
nd
v
Very High
State Highway 32
W Kiley St
St
S Impe
W Grange Ave
Gr
a
S 78th St
obi
le
High
NOTE: Groundwater recharge areas are generally

E Northon
delineated based
regional-scale
data.
Point
Rd
Dr
Ravine
E
Project design will require additional
on-site assessments.
dar Ln
W Rochelle Ave
W Meinecke Ave
W Oklahoma Ave
St
e Rd
Westlake Dr
W Ma
nitoba
W Allerton Ave
2nd
S8
W Ridg
Ln
od
wo
llen 98th St
S
SA
tz Rd
S Kur
S 113th St
Ln
S
11th
S1
m Ave
OD
W Stack Dr
S 64th St
W Waterford Ave
land D
W Grant St
W Norwich Ave
W Whitaker Ave
WM
EE
W Crawford Ave
l
rP
e
ch
Be
CR
W Eden Pl
W Ce
W Concordia Ave
R
SC
W Scott St
W Harrison Ave
S Sunset Dr
W Wilbur Ave
eek
D
ve
sA
sett
chu
W Warnimont Ave
a
ass
W Morgan Ave
S 88th St
t
S 99th S
S 111th St
S 117th St
ha
W Up
SM
W Holt Ave
W Mid
D
on
Dr
St
2nd
Dr
St
rk
wla
Nicolet Dr
W Godsell Rd
g
in
t
ing
ash
aW
n
tto
ra
St
S 10
e
shir
7th
S 11
S 122nd St eado
SM
Dr
ll D
no
yk
ar
e
S Frances Av
S la Salle Dr
S Greentree Dr
Pky
Balboa Dr
d
ar
en
rtland
let Dr
S Nico
S Cou
W Parnell Ave
r
Sp
e
at
St
Pl
ke
Dy
St
an S 75th
SV
Y
NE
y Cr
tory
NS
WO
W Lakefield Dr
W Ohio Ave
W Layton Ave
W Main St
W Dickinson St
Moderate
W Ranch Rd
W Hemlock St
W Tupelo St
W Garfield Ave
MN-18
W Park Hill Ave
W Adler St
W Bennett Ave
W
W Euclid Ave Hone
W Dosie Ave
W Carpenter Ave
Pl
enton
W Tr
W Dixon St
S 69th St
S 78th St
HO
MN-16
W Waterford Ave
Martin Dr
W Fairview Ave
t
ey S
W Hicks St
W Arthur Ave
W Waterford Sq
rth
Ma
S 85th St
S 87th St
S 95th St
W Maple St
D
elt
ev
s
oo
W Wisconsin Ave
W Madison St
W Chapman Ave
Dr
N 70th St
N 72nd St
earn
WK
W Vine St
W Washington St
W Washington St
W Allerton Ave
n
ee
N Pearlette Ln
N 67th St
r
e
Te
Av
on
rd
Le
fo
ed
M
yA
ve
l
tP
oy
W Wright St
Cedar St
Wellauer Dr
W Washington Blvd
St Jam Vista Ave

es St
W Wells St
St
W Chambers St
W Chestnut St
Rive
r Pk
y
Maple Ter
N 76th St
W Dixon S
O Connor St
Low
W Bradley Rd
W Congress St
Pl
ilip
Ph
Woodside
Ln
W Calumet Rd
W Fairmount Ave
rk wa
y Dr
W Melvina
Groundwater Recharge Potential
W Club View Dr
ay
W Monrovia W
W Florist Ave
W Capitol Pky
W North Ave
W Lloyd St
W Stevenson St
W McMyron St
W Walker St
W Eden Pl
N Wauwatosa Ave
Avon Ct
Ki
le
W Custer Ave
W Pa
W Marion St
Yale Pl
Milwauke
e Ave
Portland Ave
ge
ita
m
Ar
W Fiebrantz Ave
N 75th St
ve
dA
o
o
Ave
W
W Hope Ave
W Center St
Ave
Church St Dewey
Rd
ns
W Spring Ln
W Sheridan Ave
e
Av
Agricultural Land
W Glen Oaks Ln
W Parkland Ave
W Green Tree Rd
e
Av
W Moltke Ave
Livingston Ave
MN-17A
Co
e
nc
ta
W Thrush Ln
W Edward Dr
W Fairy Chasm Rd
W Douglas Ave
W Keefe Ave Pky
Stickney Ave
Rogers Ave
W Woodland Ave
Hillcrest Dr
N 93rd St
h St
N 95t
N 98th St
iver
Dr
Access Rd
R
er
SR
N 74th St
ing Blv
t
0th S
S 101st St
St
2nd
S 10
St
04th
S1
St
S 106th
ollm
SW
th St
WP
allo
tine
Rd
y4
wa
W Clarke St
e
W Harrison Av
W Harding Pl
W Cleveland Ave
W Montana Ave
W Montana Ave
W Dakota St
t
loi
Be
N 79th St
N Hard
N 10
S 106th St
ve
lA
igh
N 80th St
W Lorraine Pl
W Arthur Pl
a
os
nt
H
e
Av tes
ett Sta
ck ed
Be Unit
e
Av
W
ton
us
Ho
W Concordia Ave
W Rogers St
aye
W Nash St
W Adler St
l
sP
ra
Dr
W Woodale Ave
W Douglas Ave
W Birch Ave
e
Av
ky
rP
ive
Rd
na
tio
Av
e
W Keefe Ave
oo
dP
ky
at
e
CREEK
N 84th St
St
ac
m
to
Po
R
ee
on
N 104th St
N 106th St
vice
Ser
Na
Jackson Par k Blvd
W Manitoba St
Rd
N 70th St
N Servite Dr
e
Av
N 85th
N 86th St
N 86th Pl
W Vienna Ave
W Auer Ave
I-94
WH
W Woodside Dr
Be
rl i
n
Av
e
N 92nd St
m
no
Me
Pl
n
Mo
S 119
t St
Dr
Ne
w
Ci
r
ll St
Conne
W Arthur Ave
ve
aA
tan
W Edgerton Ave
bo
n
Ridge Blvd
W Hayes Ave
W Lincoln Ave
Rd
s
121
y
lle
Va
Blvd
n
Su
Pl
Sth
1
N 97th St
N 108th
A St
W Becher St
ed
fo
r
e
Av
e
tto
rb
e
e
lm
H
W Stark St
Pa
W
W
W Hampton Ave
d
W
r Ridge
S Rive
er
at
te
Clin
ton
Dorothy Pl
nd
D
W River Oaks Ln
Range Line Ter
W Woolworth Ave
W Thurston Ave
W Sheridan Av
ve
rt A
rw
Ha
W Walker St
St
W Cold Spring Rd
Sunburs
t Ln W Bobwood Rd
S 121st St S
W Scarborough Dr
W Linfield Dr
Lis
Un
de
rw
W Mitchell St
y
Pk
nd
22
S1
a Cir
N 94th St
S
ay
ky
er P
W Lapham St
r
ve
a
sh
ke
au
W
S Victori
Co
lga
W Donna Dr
W Dean Rd
W Brentwood Ave
W Thurston Cir
Access Rd
W Villard Ave
State Highway 190
Te
r
l
den P
W Schlinger Ave
W Walker St
W Morgan Ave
W Eden Trl
W Florist Ave
W Lawrence Ave
Ave
W Mill Rd
W Custer Ave
W Ar
ange
St
NI
ndu
Li strial
m
Rd
a
St
Douglas Ave
e
Av
g
ag
Fl
e
Av
ch
Bir
Ct
w
len
N 113th St
Ri
S
y
bl
S Pohl Dr
em
W
Ave
W Ohio Dr
W Wilbur Dr
ot
Ro
clid
W Eu
W Clovernook St
W Hawthorne Ave
W Rogers St
W Crawford Dr
Rd
S Alfred St
Dr
re Dr
ointe
ieldp
F
W
sn
o
W Wahner Ave
W Boehlke Ave
W Acacia St
W Lynx Ave
N 103rd St
N 108th
NG
ti
ur
C
CH
S
K
AN
EE
BR
TH
CR
SO U
OD
ERW O
UN D
W Dakota St
e
Av
e
Av
00
ay 1
N 116th St
bor
nA
ve
W Hayes Ave
Rd
Fr
e
W Denver Ave
W Schroeder Dr
W Joleno Ln
St
Ave
rch
WA
W Hustis
Ln
W Ravine
Dr
un
R
r
ee
D
W
W Radcliffe Dr
W Good Hope Rd
nk
rba
Bu
c
La
on
et
pl
Ap
ighw
N 116th St
eR
Kenmar Rd
W Montana Ave
oon
sS
t
Service Rd
du
te H
Sta
rov
W Cleveland Ave
nd
Fo
St
St
N 120th St
EE
G
Elm
ll D
Lag
Ave
N 114th
N 115th
N 118th St
N 122nd St
Blvd
CR
s
op
sh
Bi
Hi
yce
St
Pl
e
Av
N 120th St
e
Blue Ridg
Ln
n
Park L
er
nk
Bu
W Lilac Ln
W Innov
ation Dr
W Potter Rd
W Wells St
Dr
Park
W Honey Ln
W Park Ave
alla
ul Av
e
Pr
iv
y
Pk
W Meadow Ln
W Prospect Dr
W Forest Dr
PARK
St
W Win
field A
v
W Ruby Ave
SA
Kn
oll
ish
WF
W Bluemound
ear
N 87th St
n
An
rk
Pa
on
et
pl
Ap
N River Trail Dr
N Arbor D
ock
d
oo
N Jo
Rd N
N 111th St
N 129th St
lyh
Hol
oD
c
Kis
OO
Tru Ln
RW
t
un
Mo
e rw
nd
WD
W Ferguson Rd
Paddock Pky
rw
ea
Cl
W Grange Ave
elen
aC
W Calumet Rd
Kenyon Ave
Dr
N
RA
W Clinton Ave
WR
Po
rt
Av
e
W Hiawatha Dr
Corridor
Corridor
er F
ore
st D
r
W Sunnydale Ln
Donges Bay Rd
Le Grande Blvd

Less than 75 Feet
Enclosed Channel
W Liebau Rd
W Haven Ave
W Glenbrook Rd
W Darnel Ave
Scenic Ave
W Elmdale Rd
W Willow Rd
Service Rd
Service Rd
W Rohr Ave
James St
W Graham St
e
Av
N 124th St
N 131st St
DE
S 149th St
3
I-4
D
ge
rt id
es
W
d
S
ll R
a
Sm
W
l
al
Ave
Tulane St
W Honey Ln
Dr Dover Hill Ln
Sm
Knoll Rd
WD
Te
r
W Dixon St
W Forest Dr
Crimson Ln
W Howard Ave
Rd
le
vil
an
5
14
Manor Hills Blvd
N Lilly Rd
UN
W Kostner Ln
W Maple Ridge Rd
Gr
ad
Dr
W Prospect Pl
W Maylo
Ro
Ct
Oakwood
Rd
James St
W Crestview
r Ln
West Grove Ter
ber
t
Tremont St
W Beechwood Trl
unt
e
MN-14
Myrtle Ave
MN-14A
W Rogers Dr
W Beloit Rd
ee
Virginia Ave
SH
W Beres Rd
N O Connell Ln
e
at
St
n
ta
Ti
r
Golf Pky
a Dr
Dr
ltop D
W Hil
Aspen Dr
D
ood
Tr
m
El
y Ln
E Rockwa
Dr
Ln
Sunnyview Ln
Highland D
look
Cedar Ridge
tw
Wes
W Mount Vernon Ave
W Hillcrest Dr
Ove
r
lank Rd
by
im
Qu
k
ar
Dr
rt Dr
Froedte
S Parkside Dr
st
nP
Watertow
re
illc
Juneau Blvd
Madera
Ci
Cir
rc
le
S 152nd St
W Lawnsdale Rd
uer Dr
Kevena
S 162nd St
Dr
S Longview Dr
oss
W Salentine Dr
R
ke
Rd
W Barton Rd
S 166th St
iew
Ko
llv
t
hl
Hi
le C
er
a
d
s
Ct
n
ale Rd
Lawnsd
w
a
L
ivier
Gremoor Dr
Walnut Rd
Brook Ave
Nicolet Ave
W Clarke St
Gil
Le
on
arine
Dr
N Ivy
W Hadley St
W Center St
W Ka
TO
MN-17
Lee Ct
Ln
Wraybur n Rd
Dunwoody Dr
Elmhurst Pky
W Harcove Dr
W
W Chipmunk Ln
Dr
Dr
ofs
Eg
Woodsid
e
W Observatory Rd
S Martin Rd
Ct
e Ln
WR
ary R
WM
ll
Mi
idg
Partr
Hi
lls
i
W San Mateo Dr
lm
SE
e
in
ac
W Coffee Rd
Ln
Tansdale Rd
ta St
Lau
re l
Victoria Cir
Dr
view
Wood
Rd
W Ryerson
Victor Rd
Patricia Ln
Quinn Rd
S Willow R
Beeheim Rd
eh
W
d
rR
W Dako
Hil
WH
W Harvest Ln
W Townsend St
o
nbro
fD
ol
W Mulberry Dr
W Westfield Rd
d
k R W Cloverleaf Ln
W Marcia Rd
NO
YES
W Sheridan Ave
W Keefe Ave
k
Oa
W Dogwood St
W Bobolink Ave
W Wirth St
Ct
W Daphne S
t
W Jon
en St
W Feerick St
l Ln
Ave
W Portage St
W Vera Ave
rne Ct
W Luce
W Donges Ln
WM
W Tower Ave
W Juniper St
W Peck Pl
Waynescott Rd
ve
rA
e
w
W Greenwood Ter
W Metro Bd
W Colfax Pl
Hope St
To
W Calumet Rd
Ruby Ave
n St
Dr
Isl
a
Freistadt Rd
W Kathleen Ln
le
WG
W Fountain Ave
MN-12
ts Dr
Club Dr
Rd
Robin
W Rogers Dr
Brittany Dr
Heigh
W Villa Ave
W Lake Park Dr
W Eggert Pl
W Stark St
W Ally
r
View D
W Park
W Pine Ln
W County Line Rd
W Darnell Ave
e
Terra Av
W Carmen Ave
Thurston Ave
Carmen Ave
W Silver Spring Rd
Silver Spring Dr
xD
se
s
E
ok
Riv
Grand Ave
E Freistadt Rd
W Riverland Dr
Washington Ct
Dr
w
Rivervie
e Ave
W Grac
Elm St
Grace Ave
Grace Ave
W Lilly Ln
W Heather
W Bradley Rd
Mill Rd
de
Rd
Westover Rd
Woodlawn Cir
Hackberry Ln
W Glendale Dr
S Heide
Sunridge Dr
W Lincoln Ave
W Rogers Dr
W We
st Ln
dg
e
W Ridge Rd
W
Ranch Rd
Daylily Dr
n
Jerry L
Carpenter Rd
C
urst
Roosevelt Ave
Dr
Crestview Dr
Kirby St
St
rs
ffe
Je
D
nd
dla
o
o
W
Burnet St
S Carriage Ln
W Norwood Dr
l Ln
d Hil
Tremont St
r
ood D
st
W
ay
Judith Ln
Patti Ln
S Nor w
Dr
Pe
nh
ur
Dr
h
Pine
Ave
urn
Aub
idge
urt
W Co
y
Wa
orn e Ln
h
t
Bay ourn
b
Ash
Edmonton Ln
W Pinecrest Ln
W Southview Ln
W Downie Rd
S Hanke Dr
ve
eA
tD
Sunse
County Highway I
Stonehedge Dr
Davidson Rd
r
Dr a Te
ll
Vi
Ln
cin
Ra
Blackhawk Trl
rd
Wexfo
Rempe Dr
Jills Dr
n
Lege
it
Summ
Sultan St
164
Dover Dr
Golf Pky
Deerpark
Goetz Dr
E Broadway St
Hinsdale Rd
Ruby Ln
Emerald Dr
Foxkirk Dr
Hi R
Follett Dr
Ave
Fronta
ge Rd
W Corporate Dr
Anoka Ave
Pearl St
Av
e
R
d
8
1
y
wa Swenson
Dr
igh
Ri
ily
an
nD
r
Kat Dr
aD
r
Lillian Rd
Brentwood Dr
Forestview Ln
Ma
r
Ct
W Wisconsin
Kin
g
Br
oj
MN-13A
Wisconsin Ave
Briar Ridge Dr
Luella
Dr
Dr
Patricia Ln
Nicolet Ct
Hampton Ave
W Burleigh Blvd
r
ia D
Mar
a
t
n
Sa
Pomona Rd
MN-13
Mayer Ln
Evergree
n
D
rry
W Heather Ave
17
5
Fairmount Ave
W Lilly
ills Dr
ok
Bro
Hunters Run
State Highway 59
Harris Dr
dale
D
Harvest Ln
Ln
nie
Bon
k Dr
arac
Tam
Ct
Hidden H
Gree
n
Gebhardt Rd
Timberline Dr
Dr
igan
Harr n Ct
le
Cul
L
Siesta
Civic Dr
nbe
Tur
arie Ct
Jean M
ate
St
d
ite
Un
on
ingt
Ben
Ho
P
lly heas
an
Ln
t
Black Forest Dr
Ac
c
W Bluemound Rd ess
sH
Brian Dr
Dr
Brook Ln
n Rd
Warwick Dr
Bolter Ln
Larkspur Dr
kD
Par
l Rd
Kossow Rd
Dr
ay
State Highw
Arcadian Ave
Brooklawn Dr
ay
MN-11
W Donna Dr
Av
e
State Highway 190

Newell Dr
Hyland Dr
Brookhill Dr
Ln
hon
Bre
La
c
Woodland Pl
Vernon Dr
Ter
Leon
Dora
Ellis St
Ra
cin
Ruben Dr
Coral Dr
y Ln
Surrey Ln
Tanala Dr
Independence Dr
Highland Pass
Nike
r
Manhattan D
Perkins Ave
nd Ave
ve
Clevela
nfield A
N Gree
Oakland Ave
Shagbark Ln w
Vie
dow
Mea
Sierra D
Belgren Rd
t
in S
Ma
Dr
tha
Mar
Cedar Dr
n
yn
yL
t
er
Lib
t
yC
Killarney Way
Marcus Dr
Wolf Rd
Cardinal Dr
r
ust D
Stard
il
erh
Ov
Du
blin
MN-8
l Dr
Burleigh Pl
Helene Dr
y
Pk
Saratoga Rd
Countr
Pky
Alta Louise
w
Enterprise Ave
Dr
W North Ave
Alta Vista Dr
k Ln
Red Fox Dr
I-94
Kodiak Trl
ie
ev
dg
Ri
Woodch
uc
Maraljo Dr
Indian Trl
Ann Rita Dr
Astolat Dr
Coventry Dr
r
Ma
Bluem
ound
R
Dane Ct
gh
w
Lancaster Ave
ak Ln
Lone O
County Highway K
Eldorado Dr
Hi
Invery Dr
Honeysuckle Ln
t Ln
Hoffman Ave
w Dr
Midland Pl
Pl
gham
Buckin
Rd
Dr
Rivervie
Brookdale Dr
n Dr
Tennyso
Jericho Dr
Johns
o
Mountain Dr
Bar
tlett
ld Ln
Wynfie
St
n
n
tL
ood L
on
km
a
O
d Ln
o
o
w
Glen
Ln
ry
er
Ave
Almesbury
ul
Pa
d
River Rd
rb
Ba
Kathryn Ct
gw
Burnin
Joseph Rd
re s
Wilderness Way
Ln
Meadowood
Dr
Estate Cir
Burleigh Rd
Green Rd
Roundy Dr
Cir
ra
Ventu
Rd
Ln
Sh
ad
yL
ay
Gatew
D
Intertech
M
em
or
Pa
ris
h
Ln
Arroyo Rd
ky
Richland P
Glacier Pky
Lisa Ln
El Rio Dr
du
Stanford C
t
State Highway 100
NS
th
14
5
Vera Ln
Fair Oak Pky
eC
Redvere Dr
Ridgeview Dr
Primrose Ln
Beaufort Dr
d
d
ina R
Gum
Ma
pl
Xing
wood
Creek
Azure Ln
Dr
ille R
Cherokee
Danbur y Dr
lainv
Dup
Rd
Abb
ey
Scott
Ln
Whitetail Run
Meadow View
Ashford Ln
Ln
e Dr
Dr
sa
Me
County Highway VV
Wessex Dr
Rd
Lon
Dr
Wood
Ridge
Dr
tta
Joe
t
rs e
me
o
S
Northwood Dr
er R
d
St
at
e
Dr
l
Kendel P
ood Dr
Fo
nd
W Donges Bay Rd
W County Line Rd
Rd
Titan Dr
Verde Ln
Riv
e Dr
Bette Dr
sha
Wauke
D
rta
be
Ro
Vir ginia Ln
Carol Dr
y
alle
gV
Ridgew
Le
on
Brookside D
r
Wigwam Dr
e
v
A
l
au
Boboli K
nk Av
e
Kohler Ln
Ln
ce
Spru
St
Prudence Dr
Claremore Cir
r
nD
r
nD
ga
Lo
Beac
on
MN-7
thorn
Bonnie Ln
State Highway 100
Woodland Dr
Hi Tech Dr
clyn
Ma
Ct
Roundy Cir Marjean
Eileen Ave
Kathrn Ave
Haw
Weyer Rd
nR
Terra
c
Skyline Dr
Lindsay Rd
Wa
ter
tow
r Dr
Antle
Fawn Ave
Mill Rd
Bonnie Ln
Be
av
er
r
Colony Rd
Sunny D
ale
s Pky
Patrita Dr
Albert Pl
Fairview Dr
Warren St
p Dr
Hillto
State Highway 74
Sherwood
D
Ct
Saint
Jame
Butternut Rd
ay
ge
Rid
eH
w
igh
74
Rainbow Dr
Dr
WF
ores
t Vie
w Av
Robinhood Dr
Stonewood Dr
Edelweiss Ln
Narrow Ln
Davies Ct
ilton
W Good Hope Rd
Willow Ln
Elm
D
Hemlock Ln
State St
at
St
ood
D
MN-9
Way
County Line Rd
County Line Rd
Valley View Dr
Tamarack Tr
Ham
WE
dgew
Mars C
t
Dr
Brad
ley
t
Mill S
Plainview Dr
14
5
MN-6
Ave
Grand
Custer Ln
Chestnut Hill Rd
eD
dW
ay
Sheridan Dr
Susan Pl
Forest Hill Ln
Wooded Hills Dr
Keystone
D
Good Hope Rd
Ri
ch
fie
l
ay
Dr
ln
Linco
Un
ite
Forest Dr
dS
tat
St R
es
egis
Ln
l
Laure
Hi g
Dr
hw
ay
Roosevelt Dr
45
St Thom
Mar
a
s Dr
yhil
Cle
l Dr
vela
nd
Ave
Duke St
Blvd
Park
r
D
Christman Rd
Kings Hwy
ield
a rf
Dr
rd
e
G
h
p
e
h
S
y
luff Rd
B
Elder Ln
er Pk
Joss Pl
Riverside
e Riv
e
n
o
m
Meno
Tyler Dr
Ann Ave
Rd
e
Ridg
Seneca Dr
Destiny Dr
Dubnicka D
tD
res
erc
Tours Dr
St
Riv
D
Jay
Shady Ln
Bel Air Ln
Ra
intr
e
Northway
School Rd
Concord Rd
Na
va
jo
ig
hw
r
Poplar D
State Highway 167
17
5
Menomonee Ave
ott
Sc
Santa Fe Dr
Donges Bay Rd
Revere Ln
ir
Scenic
D
Lyle Ln
kD
ay
e
Av
ss
w
Pa oha
M
ne
sto
gh
w
Ln
Hi
St
at
e
ld
Fie
Stoneridge Dr
C
nd
be
ers
hway Y
Schlei Rd
N Lisbon Rd
Old Farm Rd
ur
Lar ksp
St
at
e
Catskil
l Ln
MN-5 Hedge Way

Whitetail Run
Riv
WI
O
LL
CREEK
Mequon Rd
nd
ge
e
L
er Dr
Junip
County Hig
ters
Hun
Hills
Trl
n
ry L
Dr
ne
r
ho
wt
Ha
Wildrose Ln
Willow Gate Pass
Hickory Dr
MN-4
Francese Dr
bu
Ash
Lilac Ln
Pheasant Ln
W Holly Rd
Rosedale Dr
Heidel Rd
Trl
nn Dr
e
Av
Willow Creek Rd
Sylvan Cir
W Sunnyvale Rd
n
Mequo
ma
Klien
41
on
et
pl
Ap
ass
Highland Dr
Mequon Rd
Hilbe
rt Ln
Elm Ln
N Whilton Rd
ay
Carnegie Dr
Vicksburg Ave
iew
gev
Rid
Field D
Cresent Ln
Ct
iew
Clinton Dr
Main St
Elm Ln
W Freistadt Rd
W Cairdel Ln
v
ark
NP
Edison Dr
Williams Dr
Rolling
N Brighton Pl
w
gh
P
ate
r
ore D
eg
Ston
S Sh
Lake Dr
MN-10
W Ma
rseille
s Dr
Sh
W Madero Dr
er
br
o
in St
Hi
ill L
n
Fulton Dr
Morse Dr
W Chapel Hill Rd
N Lantern Ln
es
at
St
Mequon Rd
er
H
Bunsen Dr Bunsen Dr
Country Aire Dr
d
ite
Un
Hilltop Cir
Me
ek
Oakwood Dr
Lovers Ln
Riparian Corridor
Buffer Widths
Highland Rd
Freistadt Rd
Park Ave
75
ay 1
L
HA
T
K
N
DE CREE
L
GO
Hawthorne Farm Ln
N Ma
MN-3
MN-2
W Bonniwell Rd
N Ridge Rd
ighw
Bark Lake Ln
Stonefield Rd
Av
e
eH
Stat
Hubertus Rd
Plain View Rd
du
La
c
Highland Rd
Holy Hill Rd
VE
Fo
nd
Dellwood Dr
ee Dr
Lovers Ln
Dr
Rockfield Rd
RIPARIAN CORRIDOR CONDITIONS AND GROUNDWATER RECHARGE

POTENTIAL WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
W Bonniwell Rd
Hawthorne Rd
RI
Dand
Dr
Glacier
Bark Lake Rd
EE
Rd
State Highway 167
N Granville Rd
MEN
Rockfield Rd
Skyline Dr
Maple
MN-1
lf
Wo
Evergreen Ct
Bonniwell Rd
ON
W Rockfield Rd
Polk St
N ORTH
N CH
Industrial Rd
Woodside Ln
Bonniwell Rd
Pleasant Hill Rd
BRA
Cedar Ln
Lake Shore Dr
Cedar Ln
Map 10
n
Shady L
County Highway W
Shadow Ln
Spuda Dr
Springside Ln
Pioneer Rd
n
itatio
EC
Way
E Norse Ave
Ln
Oriole Ln
N Birc
N Northwood Ln
Lakewoo
dD
Lake Shore Dr
Willow Glen Ct
I-43
Ci r
N Pebble Ln
N Lake Shore Dr
N Lake Dr
N Tennyson Dr
N Bayside Dr
N Regent Rd
at
er
By
w
N Larkin St
N Weil St
N Downer Ave
N Farwell Ave
N Stowell Ave
N Cambridge Ave
N Bartlett Ave
N Humboldt Blvd
N Bremen St
N Prospect Ave
N Oakland Ave
N Maryland Ave
N Ardmore Ave
N Woodburn St
N Marlborough Dr
N Fratney St
N Cramer St
N Pierce St
La
ke
D
Av
e
mo
N
P
ria
l D rosp
r
ec
t
Me
oln
N Cass St
Lin
c
r
bor D
N Har
S 1st St
S Logan Ave
S Pine Ave
S Ellen St
E Norwich Ave
S Lenox St S Lenox
St
S Griffin Ave
S Austin St
S 1st St
E Tripoli Ave
E Howard Ave
SW
hit
E Bolivar Ave
na
ll A
ve
S 5th St
S 3rd St
S 2nd St
E Layton Ave
S 6th St
n
itatio
EC
Way
E Cora Ave
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
State Highway 38
S 1st Pl
S 1st Pl
S Brust Ave
S Howell Ave
S 3rd St
S 5th St
S 10th St
S Clement Ave
S 7th St
S 8th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
S 13th St
N Murray Ave
N Idlewild Ave
N Jackson St
S 2nd St
Access Rd
S 3rd St
S 5th St
S 5th Pl
S 7th St
S 8th St
S 8th St
S 10th St
S 9th Pl
S 12th St
S 5th Pl
S 17th St
S 19th St
S 18th St
I-94
S 16th St
S 19th S
t
S Burrell St
S 12th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
S 19th St
S 20th St
S 21st St
S 22nd Pl
S 21st St
S 4th St
S 6th St
S 9th St
ind
la
S 15th Pl
S 15th St
S 16th St
S 19th St
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
S 29th St
ilyn S
t
S Mar
ke
Av S 12th St
e
S 10th St
S 15th St
S 24th St
S 24th St
S 25th St
S 26th St
S 31st St
ST
u ck
aw
ay
Dr
S 26th St
S 25th St
Ln
Somers
et
NB
ea
ch
N Boyd Way
N Diversey Blvd
N Holton St
N Booth St
N Buffum St
r
D
en
te
r
iv
er
c
N 2nd St
N James Lovell St
N 11th St
N 10th St
S 11th St
Co
Mu
m
s
sk
eg tock
oA
Av
e
S 17th St ve
S 14th St
S 21st St
S 25th St
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
th St
S 36
S 39th S
t
S 37th St
S 18th St
S Point Ter
S 34th
St
S 33rd St
ay
3
gh
w
Hi
Sta
te
S 42nd St
S 44th St
S 28th St
S 28th St
S 29th St
S 37th St
S 38th St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 40th St
S 40th St
S 43rd St
S 45th St
S 47th St
S 48th St
46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St
S 19th St
S 18th St
S 34th St
S 33rd St
S 35th St
S 37th St
S 38th St
S 40th St
S 42nd St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
S 46th St
S 50th St
S Layton Blvd
S 30th St
S 32nd St
S 36th St
S 34th St
S 31st St
S 40th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
Miller Park Way
S 45th St
S 47th St
S 47th St
S 51st St
Mulberry Dr
S 51st St
y
Eas
twa
Dr
N Santa Monica Blvd
N
Ba
rne Bel
t t L mo
n
nt
Ln
N Yates Rd
N Berkeley Blvd
N Shoreland Ave
N Hubbard St
N Richards St
N Achilles St
N Palmer St
N 1st St

N 2nd St
N 4th St
N 5th St
N 7th St
N 10th St
N 12th Ln
Ln
N Poplar Dr
N Navajo Rd
N Kent Ave
N Bay Ridge Ave
N 1st St N Lydell St
N 3rd St
N 2nd St
N 5th St
N 9th Ln
N 8th St
N 7th St
N 6th St
N 10th St
N 12th St
N 14th St
N 14th St
N Navajo Ave
N 4th St
N 5th St
Access Rd
N 6th St
N 9th St
N 12th St
N 14th St
N 16th St
N 17th St
N Lydell Ave
N Mohawk Ave
N 6th St
N 11th St
N 13th St
N 16th St
N 15th Ln
N 18th St
N 18th St
N 19th St
N 21st St
N Mohawk Rd
Tree R
d
N Elm
N 15th St
N 17th St
N 19th St
N 21st St
N 22nd St
N 23rd St
N 21st Ln
State Highway 57
N 23rd St
N Pheasant Ln
I-43
N Chadwick Rd
N Pheasant Ln
N Skyline Ln

N Sunny Point Rd
N Glen Park Rd
N Baker Rd
N 21st St
N 20th St
N 22nd St
N 22nd St
N 24th St
N 23rd St
N 24th Pl
N 24th Pl N 24th Pl
N 25th St
N 28th Pl
N 34th St
N 32nd St
N 31st St
Beechwood Dr
N San Marino Dr
N Spruce Rd
N River Rd
Dr
ide
N Crestwood Dr
N 24th St
N 24th Pl
N 25th St
N 27th St
N 26th St
N 26th St
N 28th St
N 33rd St
N 26th St N 26th St

N 37th Pl
N 37th St
N 41st St
N 42nd St
N 21st St
N 31st St
N 30th St
N 34th St
N 38th St
N 36th St
N 40th St
N 41st St
N 29th St
N 33rd St
N 35th St
N 37th St
N 39th St
N Sherman Blvd
N Grant Blvd
N 44th St
S 47th St
S 49th St
S 52nd St
S 51st St
S 55th St
S 53rd St
S 57th St
S 58th St
S 60th St
Dr
field
Man
s
S Taylor Ave
Grasslyn Rd
NW
ay
s
N Braeburn Ln
N Bethmaur Ln
N Flint Rd
N Bethmauer Ln
N 28th St
N 30th St
N 25th St
N 42nd Pl
N 24th Pl
N 35th St
N 29th St
N 39th St
N 27th St
N 32nd St
N 33rd St
N 36th St
N 36th St
N 38th St
N 40th St
N 42nd Pl
N Sherman Blvd
N 42nd St
N 44th St
N 50th Pl N 50th Pl
N
Alo
is
St
NP
ine
hu
rs t
N Oriole Ln
Stratford Pl
N Dean Ct
N Range Line Rd
N Seville Ave
N 34th St N 34th St
N 36th St
N 37th St
N 39th St
N 39th St
N 42nd St
N 41st St
N 44th St
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 46th St
N 47th St
N 50th St
N 35th St
N 38th St
N 40th St
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 45th St
N 47th St
N 49th St
N 48th St
N 49th St
N 47th St
N 50th St
N 49th St
N 48th St N 48th St
N 53rd St
N 52nd St
S 57th St
S 54th St
S 56th St
S 53rd St
S 58th St S 58th St
S 59th St
S 58th St
WP
a rk R
d
S 61st St
rd S
t
S 63
S 63rd St
S 66th St
S 65th St
Broad St
lac L
N Valley Hill Rd
n
N 41st St
N 40th St
N 42nd St
N 52nd St
N 51st Blvd
N 53rd St
S 60th St
S Ha
wley
Rd
S 62nd St
S 64th St
St
S 65th
S 67th St
S 68th St
S 69th St
S 72nd St
Ex
We eter St
stw
ay
Apri
cot C
t
Azale
a Ct
Charter M
al
N Range Line Rd
Valley Hill Dr
Upper River Ct
N Upper River Rd
NP
elic
an
L
Service Rd
N 43rd St
N Presidio Dr
N 54th St
N 54th St
N 55th St
N 55th St
N 54th St
N 56th St
N 54th St
ley Rd
N Haw
N 60th St
S 64th St
S 66th St
S 67th St
S 67th Pl
S 65th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 61st St
S 62nd St
S 64th St
S 71st St
S 73rd St
S 75th St
S 75th St
S 77th St
S 79th St
N 24th St
N Link Pl
N 51st Blvd
St
N5
3 rd
N Kilde
er Ct
N Arbon Dr
N 49th St
N 47th St
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 44th St
N 51st St
N Highview Dr
N 55th St
N 57th St
N 56th St
N 55th St
N 56th St
N 58th St
N 57th St
N 58th Blvd
N 58th St
N 56th St
N 59th St
N 59th St
N River Bend Ct
N Riebs Ln
N 55th St
N 59th St
N 59th St
N 58th St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 62nd St
N 64th St
S 65th St
S 63rd St
S 72nd St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 76th St
S 79th St
S 80th St
S 80th St
S 82nd St
S 81st St
N Li
Justin Dr
Riverland Rd
N Canterbury Dr
N River Rd
N Le Mont Blvd
Baehr Rd
N Bethanne Dr
N 62nd St
N 60th St
N 60th St
N 64th St
N 63rd St
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 63rd St
ir
Washington
C
N Fieldwood Rd
N Madero Dr
r Austin Ave
y View D
N Eastgate Dr
N Countr
Gazebo Hill Pky
Industrial Dr
ura L
n
N Ma
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 66th St
N 65th St
N 65th St
N 66th St
N 68th St
N 68th St
N 70th St
N 67th St
N 75th St
N 78th St
N 77th St
S 77th St
S 80th St
S 81st St
S 83rd St
S 84th St
Lake Shore Dr
S Main St
S Orchard St
N Buntrock Ave
N 68th St
N 67th St
N 67th St
N 69th St
N 69th St
N 71st St
N Lefeber Ave
St
N7
4th
Day Ct
ey Cre
ek Pky
N Hon
S 82nd St
S 86th St
S 91st Pl
S 92nd St
ie L
n
SB
onn
N 67th St
N 71st St
N 72nd St
N 74th St
N 77th St
N 81st St
g Ave
S 88th St
S 88th St
S 90th St
S 93rd St
S 92nd St
W
Bu
rd
ick
Av
e
S 96th St
N 70th St
N 73rd St
N 74th S
t
N 75th St
State Highway 181
N 78th St
N 79th St
N 83rd St
N 85th St
S 89th St
S 91st St
S 91st St
S 94th St
S 93rd St
S 96th St
S 97th St
NS
hole
s Av
e
NC
arlto
nP
l
N 62nd St N
61st St
N 83rd St
N 82nd St
N 86th St
N 89th St
N 90th St
S 94th Pl
S 93rd St
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 98th St
S 101st St
N 66th St
N 72nd St
N Swallow Ln
N 73rd St
N 77th St
N 80th St
N 81st St
N 79th St
N 84th St
N 85th St
N 86th St
N 88th St
N 88th St
N 91st St
N Swan Blvd
S 97th St
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 99th St
S 101st St
S 100th St
S 103rd St
S 104th St
S 106th St
St
at S 104th St
e
H
ig
hw
ay
24
S 110th St
S 110th St
N Enterprise Dr
Wauwatosa Rd
Pioneer Dr
N 89th St
N 91st St
N 89th St
N 93rd St
N 95th St
Rd
Ac
ce
ss
I-894
S 100th St
S 102nd St
S 105th St
S 107th St
Oakbrook Dr
State Highway 100
S 112th St
hwood
Riverland Rd
A
w Ct
W Rid
gevie
r
water D
N Bridge
Solar Ave
N 90th St
N 89th St
N 87th
St
N 92nd St
N 94th St
r
Co
lo
ni
al
D
N 102nd St
S 102nd St
S 109th St
S 111th St
S 112th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
S 115th St
Elm Spri
n
N 110th Pl
S 112th St
S 114th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
N 80th St
N 78th
St
81
st
St
N 86th St
N 87th St
N Pa
rk M
N 100th St
N 98th
St N 97th St
N 97th Pl
EK
RE
N Mayfair Rd
N 76th Pl
N 86th S
t
N Faulkner Rd
TL
LIT
Dr
anor
N 103rd St
N 101st St
N 105th St
N 106th St
N 108th St
N 112th St
N 115th St
S 116th St
St
S 122
nd St
S 122nd St
N 95th St
St
N 96th
N 99th St
N 104th St
N 102nd St
N 106th St
N 111th St
N Kn
oll Blv
d
N 105th St
N 119th St
N 117th St
S 117th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S 118th
S 128th St
S 127th St
N 113th St
N 124th St
Longwood Ave
N 117th S
t
N 122nd St
N Park Dr
Sheraton Rd
SW
ilso
nD
Dr
poin
te
High
N 99th St
N 109th St
N 110th St
N 124th St
N 126th St
Burlawn Pky
Mayfair Dr
N 131st St
S Elm Grove Rd
S 132nd St
S 130th St
S Nicolet Dr
S 94th St
t
hS
N 115th St
N 116th St
N Lovers Lane Rd
N 118th St
N 119th St
N 128th St
N 127th St
Old Lantern Dr
S 134th St
N Silver Ave
N Swan Rd
Concord Dr
Foxk
irk
Dr
M E NO M O
N 107th St
CR
Alquran Ct
N1
15
T
N 119th St
N 118th St
Park Dr
N 125th St
N 135th St
N 134th St
Loftus Ln
Ash Ct
S Sunnyslope Rd
Gre
en B
ay R
N Windsor Ct
ER
RIV
Vega Ave
NE
N Granville Rd
EE
RK
PA
A
N 124th St
r
Parkwa
yD
River Dr
Marach Rd
CH
DIT
N Fiebrantz Dr
Parkside Dr
S Meadowmere Pky
S Li
lac L
n
k Rd
S Glen Par
Forest Ave
Cedarburg Rd
Hillside Dr
N Davis Rd
LIT TLE
Dr
N Council Hills
124th St
TZK
DRE
N 124th St
Claas Rd
Campbell Dr
Lilly Rd
Oak Ln
BUTLER
S Sunny Slope Rd
t Ct
Silver M
is
S Fairlane Ave
S Brookland Rd
t
S 145th St
7th
S
S 14
S Manor Dr
N Farmdale Rd
N Briarhill Rd
CREEK
N Granville Rd
OM
MEN
Wasaukee Rd
L
NE
Dr
iew
Pa
rk v
CREEK
Stone Dr
N 144th St
San Juan Trl

Sauk Trl
S Wildwoo
S Ronke Ct
S Acredale Rd
Av
e
at
io
na
l
N
S Delphine Dr
S Small Rd
Rd
Forest Dr
AN
CH
Lilly Rd
Melville
D
Oakwood Dr
LY
LIL
Dolphin Dr
Vist
aV
iew
d Dr
Dr
Ter
way
Gre
en
S James Dr
S Moorland Rd
S 159th St
S Town Road
S Casper Dr
Fond du Lac Ave
NOR-X-
Northwood Dr
Ash Dr
r
D
eL
n
Lone Tree Rd
Woodland Ave
Pilgrim Pky
S Moorland Rd N Moorland Rd
Service Dr
S 170th St
S 171st St
S Calhoun Rd
Honey Ln
Ox
for
Merrimac Dr d St
Sylvan Ln
Northpoint
D
Woodview Dr
M
in
eo
la
Badge
rD
Cla
re B
ridg
DOUSM AN DIT CH
Indianw
o
S Executive Dr
S Forest Ln
S 167th St
S 171st St
S 169th St
S West Ln
S 179 St
Highland Dr
Churchview Dr
od Dr
Melody Ln
N 166th St
Mierow Ln
Patrick Blvd
S Michael Dr
Amber Dr
Henry Stark Rd
Held Dr
Norman Dr
Ln
Elm
Countryside Dr
Pheasant Ln
Pilgrim Rd
t
Sm
ith C
Hillsdale Dr
Norhardt Dr
Le Ch
a
Woelfel Rd
Talon Trl
S Stigler Rd
N 149th St
N 148th St
N 147th St
N 161st St
N 159th St
N 158th St
N 167th St
N 169th St
Bradee Rd
Cullen Dr
Penn Ct
N Calhoun Rd
N 162nd St
N 160th St
Greenview Ave
Evelyn Ter
Lincrest Dr
sau
D
Nas
teau
Dr
Coach H
Fiserv Dr
SW
illia
ms
S Racine Ave
S Brennan Dr
S Andrae Dr
Preserve Pky
Neptune Dr
Water St
Mary Ct
Oak Ridg
e
Trl
Marcy Rd
Imperial Dr
ouse Dr
Tilton Ln
d
R
Eg
an
S Woefel Rd
S Cari Ada
m Dr
S 200th St
S 199th St
Wasaukee Rd
Kurt Dr
Pilgrim Rd
Cats
Colonial Dr
Dr
Allen Ave
Robert Ave
Shady Ln
Dr
son
Jac
k
Shasta Dr
Bexley Dr
N Brookfield Rd
r
olli
ng
D
y Ln
SR
oun
tr
SC
S Swartz Rd
S Shady Ln
WAY
Lege
nd A
ve
kill L
n
Western Ave
Wagon Trl
Division Rd
d
Joper
R
Wildwood Dr
Wilson
Dr
Town Hall Rd
Marcy Rd
Clover Ln
N Barker Rd
S Johnson Rd
S Amor Dr
S Danny Rd
S Springdale Rd
S Valley Ln
Poplar Creek Dr
Sunnycrest Dr
Copenhill Rd
Pioneer Trl
Dr
Cherokee
Catskill Rd
S Barker Rd
Ava
lo
Ram n Dr
ona
Rd
S Edinbourgh Dr
Guthrie Dr
ONE
R
VE
RI
r
yne
D
Bisc
a
Stonewood Dr
Bancroft Dr
Pre
mie
r Ln
To
we
rR
d
Nigbor
Orchard Dr
Maple Rd
N Willow Ln
One Mile Rd
Elizabeth Ct
N Janacek Rd
Rd
Ch
ea
ne
y
Foxcroft Ln
Derrin Ln
Springdale Rd
Elmwood Dr
Misty Ln
Jaclyn Dr
Ln
oo
d
Fo
xw
Ave
Anitol St
Knollwood Dr
County Highway G
EE
ON
Fawn Ln
Woodside Ln
Well
ingto
n Dr
N Lannon Rd
Martha Ln
Ln
No
rth
Butler Dr
Mary Buth Ln
r
Lan
cel
ot D
River Ln
OM
EN
M
16
7
ay
gh
w
Hi
St
at
e
Rd
La
nn
on
Lannon Rd
Town Line Rd
Catherine Ct
Dr
Lannon Rd
Lynwood Dr
view
We
st
Wilhar Rd
Tre
e
Lon
e
State Highway 74
N Fox Hollow Rd
Scott Ln
Shadow Wood Dr
Hilltop Dr
r
ies
D
Dav
Dr
Villag
e
Sussex Rd
Waukesha Ave
Pleasant View Dr
Maple Rd
McCormick Dr
Merkel Dr
Fox Ln
Ln
Sp
ri n
gh
ill
Ln
Oa
k
Whitehorse Dr
Town Line Rd
Elmwood Rd
Tamarack Rd
F
Longv riess Pl
iew R
d
Arthur Ave
Robinhood Dr
Goldendale Rd
N Town Line Rd
Amy Belle Rd
Amy Belle Ln
Colgate Rd
Colgate Rd
Wooded Ridge Trl
Woodside Rd
Salem
Dr
Country Aire Dr
Rocky Ln
Shadow Ln
S Mayfield Rd
Oak Dr
Maple Dr
Jordan
C
ir
Ct
E Plainfield Ave
E Eden Pl
S Iowa Ave
E Waterford Ave
Ave
eld
ayfi
SD t
S
llen
SE
E Wilbur Ave
e
Av
k
s
Ru
E Car ol St
E Holt Ave
E Morgan Ave
S Herman St
Dr
e
or
Sh t
S ior S
r
e
pe
Av
Su are
S
w
la
De
W Iona Ter
y St
Concord
S Ba
E Ohio Ave
W Martin Ln
1
ay 1
Dr
E Idaho St
W Norwich St
W Armour Ave
ghw
e Hi
r
arbo
SH
Dr
R
Park
W
eb
er
4
I-79
e
r Av
otte
EP
E Pryor Ave
W Tripoli Ave
W Allerton Ave
W Denis Ave
Stat
E Homer St
E Gauer Cir
E Oklahoma Ave
S 5th St
W Water ford Ave
W Mallory Ave
rferry
S Ca
Tesch Ct
N Astor St
ren St
N Van Bu
St
ri e
EE
t
rS
ate
SW
W Howard Ave
S 7th St
W Goldcrest Ave
es St
E Lincoln Ave
E Linus St
W Saveland Ave
S 9th St
t
nd S
Dr
W Parnell Ave
St
E Montana St
E Dakota St
S 4th St
W Eden Pl
S 7th St
W Vogel Ave
S 22
reek
ay
W Ramsey Ave
W Halsey Ave
W Holt Ave
St
ney C
S Ho
wa
st
Ea
W Wanda Ave
W Ohio Ave
th
14
W Holmes Ave
E Jon
E Euclid Ave
W Colony Dr
ar
W
W Euclid Ave
S 15th Pl
W Bottsford Ave
W Arthur Ave
W Holt Ave
W Bolivar Ave
W Barnard Ave
W Hayes Ave
W Montana St
W Plainfield Ave
Ct
W Warnimont Ave
p
Ra m
W Holt Ave
N Marshall St
E Wells St
St
E Stewart
E Bay St
S 5th
Ln
St
E Linnwood Ave
E Meinecke Ave
I- 43
ry
Milky Way Rd
E Wright St
t
N Water S
N Plankinton Ave
N 5th St
ru
sk
in
S 36th St
W Edgerton Ave
Seton Pl
S 49th St
#
0
Ru
E Kenwood Blvd
E Park Pl
E Belleview Pl
E Webster Pl
Dr
E Hartford Ave
E Chicago St
W Lapham St
ve
eA
W Becher St
W Cleveland Ave
W Cold Spring Rd
Ter
Churchw
Hunters Hollow
St
W Harrison Ave
E Locust St
E Olive St
E North Ave
E
E Garfield Ave
W
oo
E Lloyd St
ds
t
S
toc
E Brown St
e E Kane Pl
c
kP
r
e
l
m
m
E Hamilton St
Co
N
E Brady St
rd
W Arthur Ave
W Tesch Ave
ook
Dr
W Abbott Ave
t
es
W Hayes Ave
ver Pky way

W Kinnickinnic Ri
rk
Pa
W Tripoli Ave
W Van Beck Ave
r
Fo
m
Ho
E Vienna Ave
E Chambers St
W Kilbourn Ave
W Greenfield Ave
S 17th St
W Dakota St
r
enb
Gre
Dr
W Rogers St
W Montana St
W Orchard St
E Capitol Dr
E Keefe Ave
St
Park Fwy E Knapp
St
N Morris Blvd
State Highway 164
xe
Pky
E Glendale Ave
N Gordon Pl
Gree
nbria
rR
elu
32 d
y
wa e R
gh hir
s
Hi
e Wil
at
N
St
Rd
es
ad N Newhall St
E Fairmount Ave
Es
tab E Hampton Ave
roo
kP
ky
W Hadley St
lya
Ha
Highland Ave
E Henry Clay St
lis
Pa
E Chateau Pl
#
*
(
!
#
0
(
!
(
(!
!
W
X
(
!
S 23rd St
Pl
an D
othm
Dr
W Park
W Burnham St
Dr
S Str
Ca Downing Dr
m
va
lin
lie
g
rD
Ln
r
E Circle Dr
WD
N 16th St
N 18th St
N 41st St
lyn
th Pl
id
ac
Pl
)
"
Gr
S 44th St
S 45th St
Je
re
Fil
lm
o re
S 50
G
ra
E Birch Ave
Lori Ln
E Silver Spring Dr
nD
ilso
NW
St
St
Hill
W St Paul Ave
t
sS
E Day Ave
t
E State S
W Wells St
o ry
WT
Dr
ns
ki
op
oe
W Vliet St
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
eve
W Vine St
W Galena St
W Mc Kinley Blvd
W Juneau Ave
W Highland Ave
W Highland Blvd
W State St
W Mount Vernon Ave
W Brown St
Ln
Rd
gacre
N Lon
d
rd y R
mba
r
on
e
W Gar field Av
Cir
E Lake View Ave
W Ring St
W Wright St
EW
ye
E Daisy Ln
N Lo
N 18th St
t
th S
N 19
N 21st St
W Locust St
N Club
E Acacia Rd
Access Rd
W Melvina St
W Abert Pl
W Columbia St
E Good
rich Ln
E Belle Ave
W Fiebrantz Ave
W Abert Pl
n
E Fox L
E Hyde Way
d Rd
irchil
N 19th Pl
N 21st St
N 31st St
W Brown St
W
W Vine St
Sa
rno
w
St W Walnut St
W Galena St
N Park Rd
l
il P
ton A
ve
W Olive St
W Clarke St
W Garfield Ave
N Ironwood Rd
Ne
ve
rA
W Lawn Ave
School Rd
W Silver Spring Dr
W Birch A
ve
W Keefe Ave
E Dean Rd
E Bradley Rd
N Fa
Rd
iew D
W Riverv
e
e Av
Sall
W la
W Fiebrantz Ave
W Meinecke Ave
E Willow R
let Rd
n Nico
N Jea
N Ironwood Ln
W Glen River Rd
W Bender Rd
te
ex
WP
u rd
ue
R
oint
E Buttles Pl
W Dean Rd
W Fairfield Ct
amp
N Point
W Berg
e n Dr
W Acacia Rd
WH
yP
E Ba
State Highway 32
ss
Acce
Av
e
e Ln
N Pelham Pky
Ln
lvd
aB
nic
Mo
Dr
ly anta
er
av N S
W
N Iroquois Rd
r
no
Ma
ar
n
e D
e Av N
St
ins
pk
Ho
St
W
al
t re
on
M
W Clarke St
D
ke
La
ia D
Ln
rgyl
NA
E Ravin
E Ellsworth Ln
W Courtland Ave
St
W
W Glendale Ave
At
kin
so
n A W Ruby Ave
ve
W Cornell St
W Congress St
W Burleigh St
land Dr
N Court
ant
N Neil Pl
Dr
N Pine Shore
l Dr
N Atwah
W Hope Ave
Miles
Dr E 1
Juniper Ct
E Juniper Ln
o
equ
NS
s
hea
NP
e
Av
Rd gview
N Pierron
on
ve
N L ara A
rd
NA
Rd
r
Shore D
y Pl
Lilac Dr
Dr
lyn
od
Wo
E Fairy Chasm Rd
W Larkspur Ln
W Heather Ln
N Glen
idne
NS
N 38th Pl
Busse Rd
Dr
okdale
ir
nia Ave 32nd St

N
N Teuto
t
ns S
opki
t
N 50th S
Oakland Ave
resta
N Bro
an C
N De
N 37th St
N 38th St
urg Rd
NH
W Cameron Ave
an Dr
Sherid
N Spruce Ln
N Greenview Dr
N la C
e Ci r
Ln
r Ln
eda
C
W
W Chambers St W Chambers St
N 48th St
N 46th St
N Hi Mount Blvd
Tenny Ave
Ln
stone Pl
N Haddon
D
olia
e Tre
W Lancaster Ave
W Nash St
Dr
W Miller Dr
0.5
W el Rancho Dr
W Bender Rd
W Cherry St
tin
ar
Trillium Rd
Aster Ln
W Zedler Ln
W Fiesta Ln 0
dar Ln
W Villard Ave
E Ravine Dr
Temperature Sites
agn
NM
N Pin
N Grasslyn Rd
lighter
N Cedarb
W Elm St
W Kiehnau Ave
W Auer Ave
E North Point Rd
Source: MMSD, USGS, WDNR,

Milwaukee Riverkeeper,
E Ravine Baye
and SEWRPC.
Rd
W Hemlock
e St
eyenn
N Shorecliff
Level 1
Level 2
W Dean Rd
W Concordia Ave
S 52nd St
S 54th St
S 56th St
S
S 61st St
S 66th St
Big Bend Dr
tr y Ln
N Coun
N Valley Dr
Milwaukee Riverkeeper Sites
"
)
)
"
)
"
W Woodbury Ln
W Keefe Ave
W Townsend St
N 54th St
dD
lan
Mid
)
"
y
rle
Mo
County Highway W
y
Pk
N Lamp
d
Fairfield R
Ct
side
adow
N Me
N 50th St
N 51st St
S 57th St
W Rita Dr
W
W Armour Ave
Northway
Service Rd
N 54th Blvd
#
0!
( W Leroy Ave
rial Cir
tz Rd
Parkview Rd
ctr
Ele
eld Ave
W Plainfi
Greenway
n
ela
5
ay
W Ch
ve
ic A
W Oklahoma Ave
S Impe
S Kur
Dr
St
W Norwich Ave
(
!
el Ave
W Vog
obi
le
W Cleveland Ave
W Grange Ave
EE
St
2nd
S8
S 113th St
Ln
S
11th
S1
rk
wla
Ln
od
wo
llen 98th St
S
SA
land D
S 78th St
S 111th St
W Mid
(
!
W Allerton Ave
tory
NS
W Stack Dr
CR
S Sunset Dr
ve
sA
sett
chu
W Allerton Ave
a
ass
W Whitaker Ave
S 79th St
S 88th St
t
S 99th S
t St
S 94th St
St
W Waterford Ave
S 61st St
SM
St
2nd
Dr
7th
S 11
Blvd
W Norwich Ave
S 61st St
Dr
S 10
e
shir
W Crawford Ave
St W Waterford Sq
7th
9
S
W Waterford Ave
W Eden Pl
W Grant St
W Lakefield Dr
#
*
#
*
#
0
or
Sh
St James Ln
Bobolink Ln
hw
Hi g
N 54th St
5
14
60th St
W Bennett Ave
Pky
Mequon Rd
W Kenboern Dr
W Douglas Ave
MMSD Rain Gage
*
(St#
#!
(
!
0
*
(
!
( W#
!
( *
!
(
!
*
(!
!
0
(!
!
k
j
( !
!
((
("
!
W#
Canal
(
!
(!
(
!
W
(X
)
(
!
(
!
(
!
*!
(
SOUTH MENOMONEE
(
!
(#
!
#
*
(
!
(
!
W Florida St
*
( MN-19 CANAL#
!
"
)
(
!
*
(
K(
0
(!
!
(!
!
(
)
"
(W Bruce St
!
(!
!
(#
#
*
)
"
EE !
#
*
BURNHAM
(
!
R
(
!
St
C
E National Ave
W Pierce
(
!
S
(!
!
(#
(
!
*
D
CANAL
O
W Mineral St
WO
(
!
W Washington St
W Scott St
(#
!
W Madison St
*
WM
W Montana St
W Dakota St
Mulberry Dr
N Fairway Ln
te
Sta
N 55th Pl
N 58th St
n
tto
iver
W Wilbur Ave
Greenhill Ln
dD
elan
Dr
N River Trail Rd
iew
Pl
l
rP
e
ch
Be
St
ra
St
W Warnimont Ave
iew
!
(
(!
!
(
WH !
e
Av
one(
clid
Eu
W!
(
!
(
(y C!
!
(reek D
r
W Ohio Ave
(
!
W Morgan Ave
nd
v
S 78th St
NE
MN-16
Gr
a
W Main St
W Dickinson St
yer
D re
S 75th
(
!
!!
(
(
(!
!
(
(
(!
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
*
#
0
(
!
e
W Harrison Av
W Cleveland Ave
W Montana Ave
(
!
W Fairview Ave
S 69th St
W Hicks St
SR
r Ridge
S Rive
s
121
S 122nd St eado
SM
e Rd
!
(
(!
!
(
(
!
(
!
HO
St
S 121st St S
lD
ol
kn
W Ridg
W Arthur Pl
Westlake Dr
W Garfield Ave
W Park Hill Ave
!
(
(W WashingtonWStWashington St
!
( W Madison St
!
(#
!
*
S 83rd St
W Mitchell St
W Maple St
W Dosie Ave
W Carpenter Ave
Dr
m Ave
(
!
S 85th St
R
er
th St
ollm
SW
S 119
nd
22
S1
Dr
y
ar
Nicolet Dr
e
S Frances Av
S la Salle Dr
S Greentree Dr
Pky
Balboa Dr
d
ar
en
rtland
let Dr
S Nico
S Cou
ha
W Up
t
ey S
earn
K
W
St
W O Connor
(#
!
W
X
#
0
(
!
*
(
!
S 93rd St
St
04th
S1
St
S 106th
ky
rP
Rd
ve
a
Ri
sh
ke
au
W
S Pohl Dr
Dr
g
in
n
ee
W Stevenson St
W Chapman Ave
W Layton Ave
D
elt
ev
s
oo
W Vine St
Martin Dr
#
*
0
t
W Dixon S
W McMyron St
W Walker St
W Eden Pl
ay
(
!
S 87th St
S 95th St
S 106th St
ot
Ro
Dr
(
!
W Holt Ave
Rd
hw
ig
K
S
W Manitoba St
eR
CH
EE
W Harding Pl
#
*
W Chestnut St
Rive
r Pk
y
Maple Ter
(
!
l
sP
aye
W Washington Blvd
St Jam Vista Ave

es St
USGS Level Gage Stations
#
0
W
X
W Fairy Chasm Rd
#
0!
k
j
W
"
)
Portland Ave"
) "
l
)k
#
*
0 (!
(
(
!
j
ton P
(
!
n
(
!
e
r
)
"
(
(
)
"
( W T!
!
(
!
(
( !
!
(!
!!
(
Cedar!
!
(
Avon Ct
St
(!
(
(
!
W Wells St
(
!
( W Wisconsin Ave
!
!
(!
!
((
W Michigan St
#
0
(
!
#
(
!
*
MN-18
Wellauer Dr
!
(
W Chester St
W Adler St
W North Ave
W Lloyd St
N 76th St
N 91st St
N 93rd St
h St
N 95t
N 98th St
(
!
N Pearlette Ln
rw
Ha
ve
dA
o
o
W Meinecke Ave
Range Line Ter
W Ce
W Kiley St
W Fiebrantz Ave
l
tP
oy
W Hadley St
W Wright St
D
on
Rd
(
!
Yale Pl
Milwauke
e Ave
Pl
W Chambers St
t
ing
a sh
aW
(
!
W Moltke Ave
ilip
Ph
W Ranch Rd
W Rochelle Ave
W Congress St
W Marion St
Stations
USGS Level Gage and MMSD
Continuous Real-Time Water
Quality Monitoring Stations
W Club View Dr
W Fairmount Ave
rk w a
y Dr
Quality
Monitoring
Stations
Isl
an
dD
* Streamflow or Stream
r #
Stage and Water Quality
W Liebau Rd
Monitoring Stations
Ln
W River Oaks
MMSD Surface Water
W Thrush Ln
Quality Monitoring Sites
W Edward Dr
#
*
Dorothy Pl
k
j
W Calumet Rd
W Custer Ave
W Pa
Monitoring Sites
W Bradley Rd
ay
W Monrovia W
W Florist Ave
W Capitol Pky
rth
Ma
Kenyon Ave
Ave
Church St Dewey
Access Rd
at
e
MN-17A
W Woolworth Ave
W Melvina St
N 73rd St
Stickney Ave
Rogers Ave
W Woodland Ave
Hillcrest Dr
(
!
!!
(
(
N Wauwatosa Ave
Jackson Par k Blvd
W Schlinger Ave
t
loi
Be
v
ark
NP
Livingston Ave
N 80th St
(
!
W Marion St
(
!
yA
ve
W Congress St
W Keefe Ave Pky
W Center St
Ki
le
Individual Permit
Non-contact Cooling Water
_
^
W Hemlock St
W Tupelo St
Stormwater Outfalls
W Glen Oaks Ln
MMSD Continuous
Woodside
Water Quality Monitoring
Ln
W Parkland Ave
W Spring Ln
CSO
SSO
er F
ore
st D Water
r
W Woodale Ave
W Green Tree Rd
t
N 58th S
t
N 61st S
(!
(!
(
!W!
(
Clarke St
W Schroeder Dr
W Joleno Ln
W Donna Dr
W Dean Rd
e
at
St
W Lorraine Pl
e
Av
ge
ita
m
Ar
ve
tt A
W Keefe Ave
ns
e
nc
ta
e
ck
Be
W Nash St
W Locust St
oo
dP
ky
W Vienna Ave
N 72nd St
W Melvina St
Co
e
Av
N Colony D r
hor
WS
in St
r
e
Te
Av
on
rd
Le
fo
ed
Ci
r
(
!
(
!
Dr
te
N 82nd St
ing Blv
t
0th S
vic
Ser
tis
ur
AN
CR
WP
allo
tine
W Godsell Rd
a
os
nt
W Birch Ave
e
rb
N 84th St
N Hard
N 10
St
Pl
N 104th St
N 107th
N 108th
BR
OD
ve
lA
N 78th St
R
ee
on
N 116th St
TH
ERW O
S Alfred St
y
lle
Va
W Woodside Dr
ra
Ln
W Ravine
Dr
un
R
r
ee
D
W
W Douglas Ave
W Thurston Ave
e
Av
tto
e
e
lm
H
W Stark St
Pa
W
W
W Hampton Ave
ll St
Conne
WH
W Arthur Ave
r
Sp
Av
e
ve
rt A
W Concordia Ave
W Auer Ave
Pr
iv
(
!
W Hayes Ave
N 74th St
N 75th St
1
y4
wa
gh
Hi
t
e
N 78th S
es
Av
t
ett Sta
ck ed
N 80th St
Be Unit
ve
A
W
ton
us
N 83rd St
Ho
W
X
N 92nd St
m
no
Me
r
lD
N 97th St
nia
olo
NC
ky
rP
ive
Un
de
rw
W Lincoln Ave
ed
fo
r
W Sheridan Av
W Villard Ave
(
!
a
ion
at
N
Co
lga
N 67th St
e
Av
Av
e
Ridge Blvd
W Walker St
W Becher St
Ct
ale
W Thurston Cir
Access Rd
e
Av
N 113th St
N 116th St
(
!
W Rogers St
W Florist Ave
ac
m
to
Po
S
ay
N 93rd St
w
len
bo
n
I-94
A St
W Brentwood Ave
Douglas Ave
W Hawthorne Ave
W Lapham St
(
!
W Clovernook St
N 86th St
N 86th Pl
NG
Lis
W Hadley St
)
"
ky
er P
NI
ndu
Li strial
m
Rd
a
St
(
!
W Mill Rd
Service Rd
Riv
W Sunnydale Ln
Donges Bay Rd
Le Grande Blvd
W Hiawatha Dr
Ave
W Boehlke Ave
W Acacia St
N 84th St
St
N 85th
Ct
00
ay 1
W Lawrence Ave
ange
St
W Hustis
(
!!
((
!
W Bender Ave
l
den P
tA
ve
CREEK
nk
rba
Bu
N 96th St
N 103rd St
N 108th
ighw
N 70th St
N 94th St
e
Av
e
Av
te H
Sta
Rd
!P A R K
(
W
X
N River Rd
N Ma
Trl
N Servite Dr
c
La
on
et
pl
Ap
e
Av
State Highway 190
(
#
0
*!
#
*
(
( !
!
! W Mitchell St
(
Rd
Ave
du
St
SO U
UND
(#
!
0
Be
rl i
n
g
ag
Fl
WR
W Good Hope Rd
W Denver Ave
W Haven Ave
W Wahner Ave
W Clinton Ave
#
*
Fr
es
#no St
*
W Ar
Te
r
N 118th St
n
Su
S
Ne
w
sS
t
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
#
0
Scenic Ave
W Radcliffe Dr
St
Ave
rch
WA
Po
r
W Mulberry Dr
W Elmdale Rd
W Willow Rd
W Glenbrook Rd
W Darnel Ave
fD
ol
Freistadt Rd
W Westfield Rd
Service Rd
W Calumet Rd
(
!
W Innov
ation Dr
W Walker St
W Edgerton Ave
yce
nd
Fo
St
N 115th
N 122nd St
eR
Pl
alla
W Wells St
W Morgan Ave
a Cir
N 87th St
St
N 114th
e
Av
N 120th St
rov
Kenmar Rd
"
)
(!
!
(
(!
!
(
(
!
Ave
W Cold Spring Rd
Sunburs
t Ln W Bobwood Rd
Sth
1
(
!
W Hayes Ave
Rd
W Scarborough Dr
W Linfield Dr
(
!!
(
(
!
(
!
ky
0
P#
(
od !
o
W Potter Rd
rw
W Dixon St
W Eden Trl
S Victori
n
An
Pl
on
et
pl
Ap
EE
G
Elm
clid
W Eu
Rd N
rk
Pa
N River Trail Dr
Blvd
CR
s
op
sh
Bi
ll D
W Grange Ave
e
Blue Ridg
Ln
n
Park L
Hi
W
oon
(A !
S!
(
(
!
(
!
#
0
#
0
*
k
j
Ave
elen
aC
W Win
field A
v
N Ivy
W Lynx Ave
W Ruby Ave
de
#
*
arine
D
Service Rd
W Rohr Ave
Kn
oll
ish
WF
o
nbro
W Marcia Rd
e
Av
ch
Bir
W
W Custer Ave
!
(
(
)!
"
(
!
(
!
WM
(
!
NO
Y
("
!
!!
(
#
*) E S (
Te
r
ve
en A
a rm
O
(
T!
!
(
AN
Rd
N Jo
le
vil
an
N 111th St
N 124th St
ock
Lag
W Wilbur Dr
y
bl
ber
t
Dr
Park
W Ohio Dr
W Crawford Dr
er
at
l
al
lyh
Hol
oD
er
nk
Bu
3
I-4
D
ge
rt id
es
W
d
S
ll R
a
Sm
W
Sm
Rd
N Arbor D
Tru Ln
OO
c
Kis
W Cleveland Ave
rw
ea
Cl
r Ln
N 129th St
RW
t
un
Mo
W Lilac Ln
em
W
(
!
W Honey Ln
W Park Ave
W Ferguson Rd
Paddock Pky
Gil
De a
rb o
rn A
ve
W Meadow Ln
W Prospect Dr
W Forest Dr
W Clarke St
W Bluemound
#
0
(
!
James St
W Graham St
Un
#
0W
Tulane St
W Honey Ln
Crimson Ln
W Howard Ave
(
!!
( (
!
Tremont St
W Forest Dr
unt
e
N 131st St
DE
W Prospect Pl
W Beechwood Trl
W Maple Ridge Rd
SH
Knoll Rd
Myrtle Ave
!
(
W Center St
MN-14
)
"
MN-14A
(
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
WD
W Harvest Ln
W Keefe Ave
West Grove Ter
(
!
(
!
e
Av
Dr
5
14
Manor Hills Blvd
N Lilly Rd
UN
Dr
W Montana Ave
W Dakota St
Dr
re Dr
ointe
W Maylo
ieldp
F
W
Dr Dover Hill Ln
Gr
ad
Dr
Rd
W!
X
(
(
!
Dr
Ro
Ct
Oakwood
ee
Nicolet Ave
W Harcove Dr
W
W Chipmunk Ln
oss
e
at
St
n
ta
Ti
k
ar
!
(
Brook
) Ave
"
W Rogers Dr
S 149th St
Tr
m
El
y Ln
E Rockwa
a Dr
(
!
MN-17
Gremoor Dr
Walnut Rd
(
!
James St
W Crestview
(
!
!
(
#
*
(
#
0!
Lee Ct Laurel
Ln
Wraybur n Rd
Dunwoody Dr
Elmhurst Pky
W Kostner Ln
by
im
Qu
ltop D
W Hil
Aspen Dr
D
ood
Sunnyview Ln
Franklin Dr
W Beloit Rd
W Beres Rd
Ln
tw
Wes
Virginia Ave
!
(
#
0"
)
Rd
n Plank
Watertow
Golf Pky
S 152nd St
ivier
Hil
l Ln
(
!
#
0
( WH
(!
!
(ul Ave
!
WC
!!
(
(
W Townsend St
(
!
Le
on
W Sheridan Ave
W Wirth St
k
Oa
Juneau Blvd
Madera
Ci
Cir
rc
le
W Mount Vernon Ave
#
0
(
!
( (
!
!
(!
!
(
W Dogwood St
W Ka
(
!
(
!
W Feerick St
!
(
(!
!
(
Hi
lls
i
W San Mateo Dr
W Salentine Dr
Dr
WR
(
!
Waynescott Rd
Club Dr
S Parkside Dr
S 162nd St
Victor Rd
!
(
(
!
Rd
W Ryerson
(
!
W Daphne S
t
W Jon
en St
W Bobolink Ave
W Peck Pl
Hope St
rne Ct
W Luce
W Donges Ln
(W Tower Ave
!
(
!
(
!
W Portage St
W Vera Ave
W Florist Ave
(
!
(
(!
!
Forestview Ln
Ct
(
!
Ruby Ave
!
(
(
)!
"
(
!
W Juniper St
W Kaul Ave
W Eggert Pl
W Stark St
ve
rA
e
w
W Greenwood Ter
(
!
(
!
(
!
W Fountain Ave
W Metro Bd
W Colfax Pl
To
(
!
r
View D
W Park
d
k R W Cloverleaf Ln
Dr
W Kathleen Ln
le
WG
Ave
(
!
#
*
#
0
#
*#
(
!
(
!
(MN-12
*
#
0!
(
!
W Darnell Ave
e
Terra Av
W Calumet Rd
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
W Villa Ave
n St
W Heather
W
X
W Lake Park Dr
(
!
(
!
(
)
"
(!
!
!
(
)
"
(
!
(
!
(
!
Victoria Cir
Rd
Robin
W Glendale Dr
W Donna Dr
!
(
(
!
(
!
Mill Rd
de
Rd
Westover Rd
Woodlawn Cir
Dr
view
Wood
ta St
Vera Ln
ts Dr
!
(
(!
!
(
(!
r
xD
tR
tad
s
i
e
Fr
ok
Grand Ave
W
E Freistadt Rd
W Riverland Dr
Washington Ct
Dr
w
Rivervie
e Ave
W Grac
Elm St
Grace Ave
Grace Ave
W Pine Ln
W County Line Rd
W Glenbrook
W Ally
Rosedale Dr
Heidel Rd
W Lilly Ln
W County Line Rd
MN-11
(
!
W Heather Ave
#
*
W Carmen Ave
(Froedtert Dr
(!
!
(!
W Rogers Dr
W Dako
dg
e
W Ridge Rd
S Longview Dr
Dr
S Carriage Ln
Brittany Dr
Ri
C
urst
Kirby St
h
Pine
Burnet St
uer Dr
Kevena
Golf Pky
*
(#
!
Newell Dr
Hyland Dr
ills Dr
Lillian Rd
!
(
(
!
Heigh
Stanford C
t
(
!
W Bradley Rd
Thurston Ave
Carmen Ave
W Silver Spring Rd
Silver Spring Dr
W Lilly
ily
an
nD
r
Kat Dr
aD
r
(
!
S 166th St
R
ke
Highland D
look
S Martin Rd
ofs
Eg
Ove
r
Br
oj
(
!
(
!
Ranch Rd
Daylily Dr
(
!
Ma
r
(
!
Fronta
ge Rd
Dr
Ct
#
*k
j
State Highway 100
NS
th
14
5
Woodland Pl
Kin
g
arie Ct
Jean M
(
!
Dr
st
(
!
Ave
Tremont St
Dr
re
illc
(
!
ary R
WM
W Lawnsdale Rd
(MN-13
!
Ter
Leon
Ct
Judith Ln
W Observatory Rd
W Hillcrest Dr
Luella
Dr
Av
e
#
* Brentwood Dr
Hampton Ave
W Burleigh Blvd
r
ia D
Mar
a
t
n
Sa
Pomona Rd
MN-13A
lm
SE
iew
Ko
llv
t
hl
Hi
le C
er
a
d
s
Ct
n
ale Rd
Lawnsd
w
a
L
Dr
igan
Harr n Ct
le
Cul
nbe
Tur
La
c
(
!
Fairmount Ave
Brookhill Dr
D
rry
du
Nicolet Ct
Lancaster Ave
(
!
#
0
)
"
Patricia Ln
Deerpark
Ln
l Dr
Fo
nd
17
5
Invery Dr
Hidden H
Cedar Dr
Pky
Alta Louise
Mayer Ln
Ruby Ln
e
in
ac
d
rR
W Coffee Rd
(
!
Dr
L
Siesta
Civic Dr
Du
blin
(
!
Ln
hon
Bre
Roosevelt Ave
S Willow R
MN-8
Vernon Dr
Burleigh Pl
Ho
P
lly heas
an
Ln
t
W Wisconsin
S Heide
eh
W
(
!
Brook Ln
Kodiak Trl
Helene Dr
Evergree
n
W Lincoln Ave
W Barton Rd
Shagbark Ln w
Vie
dow
Mea
Beaufort Dr
Arroyo Rd
Mountain Dr
y Ln
Brooklawn Dr
r
ood D
Beeheim Rd
Patti Ln
S Nor w
Ct
Rd
Cir
nd
Dr
il
erh
Ov
Dr
tha
Mar
W Rogers Dr
W We
st Ln
ll
Mi
Woodsid
e
ra
Ventu
Dr
t
urt S
n
Merlin L
Partridge Ln
Indian Trl
Foxkirk Dr
Tansdale Rd
W Norwood Dr
Dr
Sunridge Dr
urn
Aub
Crestview Dr
y
Wa
orn e Ln
h
t
Bay ourn
b
Ash
Edmonton Ln
W Pinecrest Ln
W Southview Ln
rs
ffe
Je
dla
oo
W
Quinn Rd
Follett Dr
Stonehedge Dr
Davidson Rd
l Ln
d Hil
Dane Ct
Emerald Dr
Ave
st
W
ay
Harvest Ln
Ln
nie
Bon
k Dr
arac
Tam
Wisconsin Ave
Briar Ridge Dr
Marcus Dr
idge
on
ingt
Ben
Dr
W Corporate Dr
Hi R
W Co
Countr
ak Ln
Lone O
County Highway K
Eldorado Dr
Gebhardt Rd
Black Forest Dr
Timberline Dr
W Downie Rd
S Hanke Dr
ve
eA
tD
Sunse
Pe
nh
ur
Ln
cin
Ra
Sweetbriar Dr
Blackhawk Trl
rd
Wexfo
Jills Dr
Warwick Dr
Brian Dr
r
Dr a Te
ll
Vi
Dover Dr
County Highway I
it
Summ
E Broadway St
Hinsdale Rd
n
Lege
Kossow Rd
Harris Dr
Av
e
dale
D
Goetz Dr
Pearl St
Swenson Dr
Anoka Ave
Lincoln Ave
Surrey Ln
Tanala Dr
Hunters Run
Dr
o
Bro
D
ark
kP
State Highway 59
Rempe Dr
Ra
cin
t
in S
Ma
Sultan St
Perkins Ave
Ellis St
l Rd
Alta Vista Dr
Killarney Way
Larkspur Dr
Highland Pass
Belgren Rd
Coral Dr
e
nal Av
Natio
Ave
dian
Arca
Gree
n
Dr
Bolter Ln
Midland Pl
W North Ave
Independence Dr
Ac
c
W Bluemound Rd ess
Dr
r
Sierra D
Ruben Dr
Nike
t
Niagara S
nD
yn
yL
t
er
Lib
t
yC
(
!
Hoffman Ave
w Dr
Maraljo Dr
wn
18
way
High
Enterprise Ave
Dora
n Rd
k Ln
kla
Par
Wolf Rd
Dr
s
tate
ed S
Unit
Dr
ust
Stard
Pl
gham
Buckin
ky
wP
Cardinal
Saratoga Rd
ld Ln
Wynfie
vie
ge
Rid
Red Fox Dr
I-94
t Dr
Rivervie
Brookdale Dr
n Dr
Tennyso
Woodch
uc
r
Ma
Bluem
ound
R
Bar
tlet
Ann Rita Dr
Astolat Dr
Coventry Dr
Jericho Dr
Johns
o
St
d Nancy Ct
Pa
ri s
h
Ln
El Rio Dr
Honeysuckle Ln
t Ln
Wilderness Way
River Rd
ry
er
Rd
nR
Ln
Ave
Almesbury
ul
Pa
n
n
tL
ood L
on
km
a
O
d Ln
o
o
w
Glen
gw
Burnin
Meadowood
Joseph Rd
ky
Richland P
Kathryn Ct
rb
Ba
Ln
Lisa Ln
Estate Cir
Burleigh Rd
Rd
n
Marjea
Green Rd
ay
Gatew
Sh
ad
yL
Ln
Dr
Roundy
D
Intertech
M
em
or
re s
#
*
Fair Oak Pky
Redvere Dr
Ridgeview Dr
Primrose Ln
Abb
ey
Glacier Pky
eC
Azure Ln
Dr
d
State Highway 190
Wa
ter
tow
Cherokee
ille R
d
ina R
Gum
Xing
wood
Creek
Meadow View
Ln
Danbur y Dr
lainv
Dup
y
alle
gV
Whitetail Run
Ma
pl
D
sa
Me
Scott
Ln
County Highway VV
Wessex Dr
Rd
t
rs e
me
o
S
Carol Dr
Rd
Dr
Wood
Ridge
Dr
tta
Joe
Ashford Ln
l
Kendel P
ood Dr
ay
n
Jerry L
Cedar Ridge
er R
d
e Dr
Verde Ln
D
rta
be
Ro
Vir ginia Ln
Riv
Ridgew
Dr
gh
w
!
(
(
!
#
*
Brookside D
r
Wigwam Dr
e
v
A
l
au
Boboli K
nk Av
e
Bette Dr
r
nD
ga
Lo
Ln
Northwood Dr
ce
Spru
r
nD
Kohler Ln
(
!
MN-7
Sunny D
ale
thorn
e Dr
Hi
W Donges Bay Rd
#
0
Rd
!
(
)
"
(
!
Prudence Dr
Claremore Cir
(
!
#
*
St
at
e
Woodland Dr
Eileen Ave
Kathrn Ave
St
Le
on
Dr
(
!
Terra
c
County Line Rd
)
"
(
!
!
(
(
!!
(
Albert Pl
Hi Tech Dr
sha
Wauke
Lon
(
!
Stonewood Dr
Edelweiss Ln
r Dr
Antle
Fawn Ave
p Dr
Hillto
r
Colony Rd
Haw
Weyer Rd
Ct
Sherwood
D
Skyline Dr
Lindsay Rd
Be
av
er
wk D
Rainbow Dr
Mill Rd
clyn
Ma
Ma
nh
att
an
N O Connell Ln
a
Moh
Butternut Rd
s Pky
Bonnie Ln
Fairview Dr
Robinhood Dr
Valley View Dr
Tamarack Tr
WF
o re s
t Vie
w Av
(
( !
!
)
"
k
#
j
*
0
(
!
se
Es
(
!
Beac
on
W"
X
(!
!
)!
(
(
Ct
Clover Dr
Linden St
( !
!
(
("
!
) !
(
Way
(!
!
(
(
!
!
(
St
(Warren
!
(
!
Bonnie Ln
Dr
Patrita !
(
(
!
State Highway 100
)
"
t
Mill S
ay
(
!
County Line Rd
Ave
Grand
W Good Hope Rd
w
igh
)
"
Sheridan Dr
kD
Main St State Highway 74
eH
ood
D
ge
Rid
wic
Saint
Jame
Hemlock Ln
State St
74
dW
ay
MN-9
Narrow Ln
Dr
e
ndl
Ca
at
St
Willow Ln
Elm Dr
WE
dgew
Davies Ct
ilton
Destiny Dr
Tours Dr
Ham
Keystone
D
eD
r
Poplar D
State Highway 167
Brad
le
MN-6
!"
(
)
Custer Ln
Good Hope Rd
Ri
ch
fie
l
14
5
(
(!
!
(
!
!
(
(
!
!
(
Ra
(!
!
( intree D
!!
(
(Starlit
(
!
Dr
ay
ln Dr
Linco
Northway
School Rd
Concord Rd
Na
va
jo
ig
hw
Donges Bay Rd
(
!
(
!
Bel Air Ln
Un
ite
Forest Dr
dS
tat
St R
es
egis
Ln
l
Laure
Hi g
Dr
hw
ay
Roosevelt Dr
45
St Thom
Mar
a
s Dr
yhil
Cle
l Dr
vela
nd
Dr
Ave
ood
Elmw
Duke St
Blvd
Park
r
D
Christman Rd
Kings Hwy
ield
a rf
Dr
rd
e
G
h
p
e
h
S
y
luff Rd
B
Elder Ln
er Pk
Joss Pl
Riverside
e Riv
e
n
o
m
Meno
Tyler Dr
Ann Ave
Rd
e
Ridg
Seneca Dr
Chestnut Hill Rd
Cir
w
gevie
tD
res
erc
ir
Forest Hill Ln
Wooded Hills Dr
S Rid
Riv
C
nd
be
ers
D
Jay
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
Shady Ln
#
*
*
#
0
Plainview Dr
N Ridgeview Cir
Ln
(
!
17
5
Lyle Ln
Santa Fe Dr
Revere Ln
Susan Pl
Plain View Rd
Stoneridge Dr
Wildrose Ln
ay
ur
Lar ksp
Whitetail Run
St
at
e
(
!
(
! !
(
(!
!
(
!
(
!
(!
(
Old
Farm Rd
(
!
(
!
(!
!
(
(!
!
(!
!
(
(
!
(
(
!
MN-5 Hedge Way !
(
er Dr
Junip
(
!
gh
w
(
!
t
le
Lilac Ln
Menomonee Ave
Dubnicka D
#
*
Riv
Scenic
D
rn
ho
t
w
Ha
Pheasant Ln
Mequon Rd
!
(
n
L
y
(D!
bur !
r
(
Ash
e
ar
Sc
nn Dr
(
!
! !
(
(
( Sylvan!
(Cir
(!
!
( Francese Dr
!
W Holly Rd
n
Mequo
(
!!
(
#
*
Hi
!
(
(
!
Vicksburg Ave
Hilbe
rt Ln
Elm Ln
W Sunnyvale Rd
iew
N Lantern Ln
ma
Klien
!
(
#
*
(
!
(
!
Main St
Elm Ln
Cresent Ln
Ct
N Ridge Rd
Mequon Rd
St
at
e
0
##
*
W Freistadt Rd
Field D
W Ma
rseille
s Dr
Sh
W Madero Dr
er
br
o
W Cairdel Ln
gev
Rid
N Whilton Rd
41
St
Carnegie Dr
hway Y
(
!
ott
Sc
Clinton Dr
County Hig
Schlei Rd
N Lisbon Rd
!!
(
(Edison Dr
(
!
e
Av
Hickory Dr
County Line Rd
MN-10
Rolling
N Brighton Pl
ay
on
et
pl
Ap
ass
WI
O
LL
Lovers Ln
W Chapel Hill Rd
Highland Rd
Oakwood Dr
n
Shady L
POINT SOURCE OUTFALL LOCATIONS AND WATER QUALITY MONITORING

STATION LOCATIONS WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
W Bonniwell RdPoint Sources
W Bonniwell Rd
Hawthorne Farm Ln
#
*
Williams Dr
Fulton Dr
Morse Dr
Dellwood Dr
w
gh
P
ate
ters
Hun
Trl
Hills
MN-2
Country Aire Dr
Bunsen Dr Bunsen Dr
)
"
CREEK
Holy Hill Rd
(
!
(
!
Hi
eg
Ston
Highland Dr
Av
e
Freistadt Rd
es
at
St
ill L
n
du
La
c
Highland Rd
Park Ave
d
ite
Un
Hilltop Cir
Mequon Rd
er
H
Rockfield Rd
75
ay 1
Me
ek
MN-4
Willow Gate Pass
Fo
nd
Lovers Ln
L
HA
T
K
N
DE CREE
L
GO
Lake Dr
Willow Creek Rd
ee Dr
Dand
MN-3
ighw
Stonefield Rd
Lakeview Rd
Hawthorne Rd
VE
eH
Stat
Hubertus Rd
S Shore Dr
RI
Dr
Glacier
Bark Lake Rd
MEN
EE
Rd
Skyline Dr
State Highway 167
N Granville Rd
Rockfield Rd
lf
Wo
Evergreen Ct
MN-1
NCH
Cedar Ln
Bonniwell Rd
ON
W Rockfield Rd
Polk St
BRA
Industrial Rd
Cedar Ln
NORTH
Woodside Ln
Bonniwell Rd
Pleasant Hill Rd
Map 11
Lake Shore Dr
Springside Ln
Pioneer Rd

S 76th St
S 76th St
S 75th St
S 76th St S 76th St
S 75th St
E Holt Ave
riffin
SG e
Av
(
!
E Otjen St
e
r Av
otte
P
E
Pa
rk
R
d
r
i
C
r
Pa
rk
e
R
d
au
E G E Gauer
Cir
(
!
!
(
Price
(E LaytonE Ave
!
(Ave
!
(!
!
(!
(
#
*
W
X
E Norse
Ave
k
La
E Birchwood
Ave
S Packard Ave
Monitoring Sites
#
*
#
*
#
0
_
^
k
j
#
0
Dr
!"
(
)
E Grange
E Grange
E Grange Ave Ave
Ave
#
*
Dr
11th Ave
e
ksid
re e
SC
S Barland
Ave
Carroll Ct t
kS
Tamaricac
H kory St
S Lipton
Ave
E Edgerton
Ave
( "
(!
!
)
ll
na
hit
S W Ave
all
hitn
S W Ave S Barland
Ave
E Dale
Ave
S Illinois Ave
(
!
S Troy
Ave
!
(
(
!
(
!
(
!
(
!
S Illinois
Ave
"
)
)
"
S
)
Sh "
o
re
ic
inn
i ck
nn
Ki Ave
State
Highway 38
S 1st St
3rd
St
E College Ave
Be
n
S India Ave net
t
na
Ave
#
*
(
!
E Rusk
Ave
E Oklahoma
Hi St
Ave
gh ate
ve
w
st A
e
r
c
0
0.5 ay 3
1 Miles
ill
H
Ohio
E
E
2
hio Ave
O
E
E Holt
Ave
Source: MMSD, USGS, WDNR,
E Vollmer
Ave
E Carol St
Milwaukee
n Riverkeeper,
E
E Morgan
Ave Morga
and SEWRPC.
St
E
Ave
Ave
E Warnimont Francis
Ave
Ave
th
abe
z
i
l
nig
E Saveland
E E Ave E Koe
e
Ave
v
g
i
A
n
E Tripoli
oe
Van
E Howard E
E K ve
Ave
A
Beck
Ave
h
E Norwich
E Norwic Ave
Ave
E
E Denton Ave
E Denton
Ave
EL
E Leroy Ave
e ro
yA
ve Ave E Whittaker
Ave
E Van
E Van
Norman
Norman
r
Ave E Armou
Ave
Ave
E Cudahy
E Price Ave
SW
hitn Ave
E Layton
all A S
ve Wh E Layton Ave
Ave
Av itna
e ll
E Somers
Ave
S Iowa
Ave
r Dr
S Arctic
Ave
Iro
S Arctic
St
Ave
len
El S Iowa
S
Ave
S Kansas
Ave
Hutsteine
S Pine
Ave
!
(
W Edgerton
(Ave
!
( E Joseph M
!
S Clement Ave
S Logan
Ave
E Waterford Ave
E Howard
Ave
E Norwich
Ave
St
S Kansas
Ave
S Iowa
Ave
(
!
!
(E Smith St
!
W(
X
S Ace
Industrial Dr
5th
5th
794
794
5th 794
S Delaware
5th 794 In
5th 5th 794
ternation
Ave
al Dr
794
SN
S Indiana Ave
i
c
h
Ave
a
a
Indian
S
S Indian
o
S Illinois
Ave lson
Ave S Illinois
Ave
S Merill Ave Ave
S Robert Ave
S Elaine
14th Ave
S Barland
Ave
14th
Ave S Mc
Ave
Creedy
S Kingan
Ave
1th
S Packard
Ave
S Kingan
Ave
S Packard Ave
Ave
Ave
(
!
S Logan
Ave
W Boden St
W Uncas
Ave
W College
St
W College Ave Ave
S Logan Ave
S Lenox St
S Quincy
Ave
(!
!
(
W Van
Norman Ave
S Burrell St
W Edgerton
Ave
W Abbott
Ave
ma
ho
a
l
Ok v e
W
A
rk
Pa d
R
W Layton Ave
#
*
!#
(
0
( !
!
(
St
E Jones
(
!
#
*
E Greenfield
Ave !
(
#
0
(
!
#
*
#
*
ger
bar
th
or Line er
T
tw S
en e
W Av t
S
S S St
t
r
4
S S St ClaiSt
I-79
ay
lair
r Dr
C
tSB
arbo t
S Logan
4
ay S
SH
I-79
Ave
yS SB
r Dr
arbo
ry Dr E Ba cess Rd
S HS Carfer
Ac
S Aldrich St
#
!
(
*
( CREEK
!
(
!
(
!
W Armour
Ave
W Martin Ln
S 1st St
( !
!
(
W Bolivar
Ave
S 2nd St
W Water ford
Ave
S 1st St
!!
(
(
I-794
(
!
#
*
#
(#
!
0
**
(
!
##
*
(
!
(
!
)
(!
("
(!
!
S Adams
Ave
W Howard
Ave
I-43
(
!
I-43
(
( !
!
#
!*
#
*
0
((
!
(
!
(
!
_
^
(
!
S 1st St S 1st St
St
S 9th St
an
ad
a
S 7th St
Gr
S 6th St
State H
ighway
ge
119
an
KK-5
Gr e
W Av
ir
A
W Grange Ave W
y
W Grange Ave
KK-4
o Wa
te
Carg
W Klein
Sta y 119
a
Ave
hw
Hig
ion
itat
W Goldcrest
E C ay
W
Ave
W Iona Ter
W Upham
Ave
(
!
KK-10
S 5th St
t
nd S
S 18th St
ey
on r
H kD
S ree
C
I-43
3
I-4
dale
ose
R
W Ave
*
0
( #
!
St
W Bruce St
W National
Ave
W Walker St
Acc
ess
W Mineral St
Rd
S Brust S
Kansas Ave
Ave
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
W Pierce St
o
ins
ob
S R Ave
RIVE R
th
S4
(
!
PA
R
S 6th St
" !
)
(
S 6th St
S 7th St
S 22
y
S Hone
Dr
Creek
W Kimberly
Ave
W Mangold Ave
W Alvina
W Alvina Ave
Ave
St
Oregon
ri e
EE
W Becher St
te
Sta y 38
a
hw
Hig
#
*
KK-11
S 2nd St S 2nd St
(
!
I-43
Ct
S 5th
(
!
t
S 16th S
S 21st St
W Holmes
W Halsey Ave
Ave
W Edgerton
W Edgerton W Edgerton
Ave
Ave
Ave
S 26th St
Teakwood Dr
S 43rd St
W Goldcrest
Ave W Ramsey
Ave
KK-8
S 14th St S 14th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
S 16th St
W Holt
Ave
W Hayes
Ave
S 4th St I-43
S 5th St Pl
S 5th
S 6th St
S 20th Pl
S 22nd St S 22nd St
!
(
(
!
!!
(
(
43
Parkway
Parkway Dr
Dr
3 II-4
W Cleveland
Ave
S 12th St
S 78th St
S 79th St
S 79th St
S 77th St
S 77th St S 78th St
S 78th St S 78th St
S
76th
St
S 77th St
S 76th St S 76th St
St
S
S
St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 75th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 73rd St S 72nd St
S 71st
S 72nd St
St
S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 71st St
S 72nd St S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St S 70th St
C
S 68th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
ro
St
68th
S
St
69th
S
S
S
68th
St
68t
h
S 67th St
St
cu
S 68th St
S 68th St
s
S 68th St
S 68th St
S 67th
S 67th St
S 68th St S 68th St
C
WK
S 66th St
S
66th
St
S
66th
t
St
innic
S 66th St
S 67th St
S 65th St
S 67th St
kinn S 65th St
S 65th
St
66th
St
S
66th
S
S 66th St
ic
St
Rive
St
65th
S
S
St
65th
S
r
S
65th
St
S 64th St
6
4th S
Oakwood Ln
S 63rd St
S 64th St
Pky
t
Middleton Dr
S 64th St
S 63rd St
S 62nd St
S
62nd
St
St
Sta
63rd
S
St
63rd
Sq
Sunset
S
St
S 63rd
t
Badger Ct
Hig
S 62nd St
S 61st St
Mansfield
S 61st St
h wa e
S 62nd St
Dr
S 61st St
S Ha
S 60th St
y 36
S
60th
St
S
w
S 60th St
Hig tate S 60th St
S 58th St
La
St
60th
S
St
60th
d
S
St
St
60th
h
S
60th
S
St
S 60th
S 60th St
way
S 60th St
S 58th St
ke
S 60th St
S 57th St S 58th St
S 58th St
36
S 57th St S 57th St
vie
St
58th
S
St
58th
S
St
S 57th St S 57th St
S Oak
w
Maplewood Dr
S 57th St S 57th
S 57th St
S 56th St
S 56th St
Ea Dr Lynn Me
S 52nd Pl
Park Ct
S 56th St S 56th St
St
St
56th
S
56th
S
stw R
St
55th
S
adow G
St
55th
S
ay d
S 55th St
D r re e
S 55th St
53rd St
S 54th St SS52nd
nb
S 54th St
St
S 53rd St
ro
S
St
53rd
S
5
1
ok
st St
W
S 52nd St
S 52nd St
St
52nd
S
S
50th
St
E
Te
lec
WM
S 50th St
S 51st St
S 49th St
S 51st St r
S 51st St
tric
a
S 50th St S 50th St
S 49th St
Lea ple
S 48th St
Av
S 48th St
f Ci r
St S 49th St
e
S 49th St
S 47th St SS49th
S 48th St
48th St S 48th St
S 48th St S 48th St
St
S
46th
47th
S
St
St
47th
S
S 47th St S 47th St
S 45th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St S 45th St
S 45th St
St S 45th St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
S 45th St S 45th St
S 44th St
S
43rd St
S 44th St
St
44th
S
St
44th
S
S
43rd
St
H
S
S 43rd St
S 44th St
Miller Miller
S 43rd St
igh ta
S 43rd St
S 43rd St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 41st St
wa t e
S 41st St
Park Park Way
St
42nd
S
y
S 42nd St
S 41st St S 40th St
S 41st St
36
Way
St
S 41st
S 39th S
S 38th St
S 40th St
S 40th St
t
S 40th St
S 39th St
Access Rd
S 38th St
S 38th St
S
37th
St
Sta S 39th St
H
S 38th St
igh te
S 38th St
S 36th St
SL
S 36th St
S 37th St
wa
S 37th St
or
S 37th St
S 36th St
S 37th St
h St
S 35th St
S 36th St
y3
S 35th St
S 35th St
S 37th St
Av ene
S 35th St
6
S 35th St
e
S 34th St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 35th St
S 33rd St S 33rd St
Somerset Ln
S 35th St S 35th St
Av hea
S 35th St
S 34th St
S 32nd St
e
S 33rd St
S 31st St
S
30t
h St S 31st St
S 30th St S 30th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 32nd St
S 31st St
S 29th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 31st St
S 30th St
S
28th
St
S 29th St
S 29th St
S 29th St S 29th St
S 29th St
S 28th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
State
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 25th St
S 25th St
Highway 57
S 27th St
S
St
26
26th
S
th
S2
St
S 24th St
4th
SK
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 25th St
S 24th St
St
24th
S
S 24th St S 24th St
Ct
e
S 23rd St
S 23rd St
n
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S 22nd Pl
S 21st Pl
Av tucky
S 22nd Pl
S
e
Pe
S 22nd St
S 21st St
M
ar
S 21st St
S 21st St
S 21st St
u
S 20th St
S 20th St S 21st St
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S
20th
l
St
St A ske
S 20th St
S 20th St
S
19th
St
S Aetna
St
St
20th
20th
S
S
S 21st St
v
S 19th St
g
St
St
S 19th St
20th
S
20th
S
e
o
S 19th St
S
S
18th
18t
St
h
St
St
St
19th
Blvd
S
19th
S
S 18th St
St
S 19th
S 18th St
S 17th St
S 17th St
S 19th St
S 18th St
S 19th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
S 17th St
I-94
S 17th St S 15th
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
S 17th St
S
S 17th St
15t
h Pl
N 16th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
St S 15th Pl
16th
S
I-94
I-94
St S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl W
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
W
S
14th St
S 15th St
S 15th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
in
S 14th St
S 15th St
S 13th St
Av dla S 14th St
S 14th St
S 14th St S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
k
e
S
12th
St
S
e
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
11th St
S 13th St S 13th St
S 12th St
S 13th St
S
10th
S
St
10th
St
S 11th St
S
10th
St
St
S 11th St S 11th
S 11th St
S 10th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 10th St S 9th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 9th Pl S 9th Pl
S 8th St
S 9th Pl
S 8th St S 9th St
S 9th St
State S 8th St
S
7th
St
S 8th St
S 8th St
S 8th St S 7th St
Highway 38
S 6th St S 7th St
S 6th St
S 8th St
S 7th St
Access Rd
St
6th
S
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
6th St
S
I-43
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 5th St
St
S 6th St
5th
S
S 5th St
ss Rd
S 4th St S 4th St
S 4th St
St
5th St
St
4th
S
S
5th
St
4th
S
S
S 5th St
S 2nd St S 2nd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 2nd St
S 3rd St S 3rd St
S 1st St
S 2nd St S 1st St
St S 2nd St
S 1st St
3rd
S
S
1st
Pl
S 3rd St
State
S
S 1st St
S 1st St
H
S 1st Pl
Highway 38
S 1st StA owell
S Burrell St
St S
ve
SH
Wa
S Austin St
S Whitnall
owe
ter
S
State
H
owell
Ave ll
S Austin St
St
Ave
38
y
Highwa
S Austin St
Ave S Brisbane
S Griffin Ave
Ave
S Quincy
S Griffin
S Griffin
S Mound St
S Taylor
S Adams Ave
Ave
Ave
Ave
S Aldrich St
Ave
S Taylor Ave
S Taylor
S Pine
S Pine Ave
Pine Ave
S
Ave
S
Ave
S Lenox St
He S Lenox St
S Logan
S Logan
rm
S Logan
an
Ave
Ave
St
Ave
S Clement
S Clement
S Nevada St
Ave
Ave
I-794
S Nevada Ave
S Brust Ave
S 78th St
W Bruce St
S 15th St
W Grange
W Wanda Ave
Ave
W Becher St
S 7th St
(0
#
*
!!
(
(!
!
(
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
S 24th St
rS
ine
KK-6
St
S a
w
gh
Hi
t
S 17th S
st
re
o
e
F
W Hom e
Av
S 17th St
S 18th St
W Holt
Ave
S 25th St S 25th
#
0#
#
*
*
#
*
W Scott St
S 11th St
S 24th St
S 26th St
S 28th St
ON
SM
n
sh L
arbu
g
u
S
r
gD
ge
lin
W Colle
r
e
Sterling C
e
v
St
A
t
rk Ln
Skyla
Ln
Ln
ony
Sax
hwood
W Birc
Ave
W Ramsey
Ave
!
(
( t!
!
(
e
at y 36
ILS
S 36th St
W Edgerton
Ave
S 31st St
ale
nd
n
y
L
W Ave
S Layton
Blvd
W Edgerton
Ave
S 31st St
S 34th St
W College
Ave
n
tto
Su
Ox
for
Dr d
Oakwoo
d St
W OhioW usk
i
Ave
Po n St
eS
t
W Morgan
Ave
S 35th St
S Ka
telyn
Cir
S 33rd St
nic
nickin
W Kin er Pky
Riv
ry L
Sur
y
one
S H k Dr
Cree
e
sid
ke
La Dr
t
S 45th S
W Edgerton
Dr Ave
y
e
l
S 36th St
!
(
(!
!
(!
!
(
(
(
!
S 21st St
W Mitchell St
t
S 38th S
S 40th St
(
!
S 46th St
S 48th St
Ln
S 51st St
pia
ym
Ol Dr
y
Eastwa
Sherwood
Rd
urn
db
Ra
R
Northway
(
!
d St
t S 52n
S 54th St
EE
e
gl
An Ln
r
Mo
PARK
65th Ct
tional
W Na
Ave
S 28th St
S 29th St
(
!
S 44th St
LYONS
Ave
er
Mill k S 43rd St
Par
y
Wa
S 46th St
S 47th St
KK-2
St
(
!
S 57th St
Enfield
Ave t
Con
S
ifer
Ln
on
t
s
ay
Eu Darnell Southw
Ln
y
a
W
Devonsh
ire
Ave
Root
River
Pky
ay
(
!
Pl
er
S 57th St
Northw
ay
S 65th St
Millbank Rd
Mead Rd
W Edgerton
Ave
S 60th St
erial
S Imp
Cir
nw
re e
G
W Grange
ch
Be
S 59th St
S 65th St
S 74th St
Fielding
Ln
S 68th St
W Tripo
W Howard
li Ave
KK-1
Ave
W Van
Beck Ave
W Tesch
WP
Ave
eld
lainf
fi
in
la
i
WP
Ave eld
e
Leroy
W
v
A
roy
Ave
W Le
W Bolivar
KK-7
W Cold W Bolivar
W Cold
Ave
W Cold
W Cold
Ave
W Cold
Ave
Rd
g
Sprin
Rd
Spring
Spring Rd
B
W
3
W Bottsford Ave
Ave
W Allerton
I-4
e 24
t
W Van Ave
a y
erton Ave
All
t
W
S wa
Norman
I-43
I-43
I-43
gh
i
3
Ave
H I-43 I-4
W English
W Layton
W Layton
Ave
Dr
W Layton
Ave
W
Layton
Ave
Ave
on
Layt
Ave
W Holt
Ave
nt
o
m
i
a rn
gia
Pl
or
W W AveW Eden
e
Ge v e
v
A
W A
bur
Wil
W Crawford W W Do
dg
Ave
eP
l
W Howard
Ave
4
e
at 2
St way
gh
Hi
S 71st St
!
(
oln
oln
(W Linc
!
W Linc
(
(!
!
Ave
Ave
(
!
yes
(!
!
(#
W Ha
0!
(X
(l
!
W
th P
Ave W K
u
t
(
!
KINNICKINNIC R inni
WS
ive cki
l
(
!
n
P
)
"
)
"
r
(
!
Pk nic
er
y
ey
Dr
(
!
W
(
!
)
"
(
!
(
!
#
*
(
!
(
!
#
0!
(
(
!
Stac
k Dr
t
KK-3
S
W Bennett
(
!
th W Bennett
(
!
74
Oklahoma Ave
W
Ave
S
Ave
(
(Dr !
W Lakefield!
W
W
R
W Euclid
W
S 46th
W Washington St
S 61st St
(
!
S 65th St
Bur
d
Ave ick
S 73rd St
S 76th St
S 79th St
S 78th St
I-94
S 65th St
y
ne y
Ho k P k
S 78th St W ree
C
Ave
r
Eat
on
S 76th St
Ln
S 76th St
S 76th St S 76th St
Eldon St
I-94
t
S 75th St
S 79th St
Overlook
D
RIVER
Map 12
POINT SOURCE OUTFALL LOCATIONS AND WATER QUALITY

MONITORING STATION LOCATIONS WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
Point Sources
CSO
SSO
Stormwater Outfalls
Individual Permit
Non-contact Cooling Water
Water Quality
Monitoring Stations
Streamflow or Stream
Stage and Water Quality
Monitoring Stations
MMSD Surface Water
Quality Monitoring Sites
MMSD Continuous
Water Quality Monitoring Stations
USGS Level Gage and MMSD

Continuous Real-Time Water
Quality Monitoring Stations
USGS Level Gage Stations
Milwaukee Riverkeeper Sites
MMSD Rain Gage
Level 1
Temperature Sites
Level 2
E Ramsey
Ave
N Birc
N Northwood Ln
Lakewoo
dD
Lake Shore Dr
Willow Glen Ct
I-43
Ci r
NP
ine
hu
rs t
N Pebble Ln
Ln
at
er
By
w
NB
ea
ch
N Boyd Way
Dr
N Santa Monica Blvd
N
Ba
rne Bel
t t L mo
n
nt
Ln
N Yates Rd
N Larkin St
S 1st St
N Prospect Ave
N Downer Ave
N Maryland Ave
N Oakland Ave
N Bartlett Ave
N Stowell Ave
N Farwell Ave
N Cramer St
La
ke
D
Av
e
mo
N
P
ria
l D rosp
r
ec
t
S Pine Ave
S Ellen St
E Norwich Ave
S 2nd St
S 3rd St
S 5th St
S 6th St
Way
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
SW
hit
E Bolivar Ave
na
ll A
ve
E Layton Ave
tion
Cita
E Cora Ave
E Tripoli Ave
E Howard Ave
S Lenox St S Lenox
St
S Griffin Ave
S Taylor Ave
E Plainfield Ave
S Austin St
S 1st St
S 5th St
S Logan Ave
S 1st Pl
E Waterford Ave
S 1st Pl
S 5th Pl
S Brust Ave
S Burrell St
State Highway 38
S 9th St
S 10th St
S Clement Ave
S 7th St
S 8th St
S 9th Pl
S 11th St
S Howell Ave
S 7th St
S 9th St
S 8th St
S 10th St
S 12th St
S 12th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
S 13th St
oln
Me
S 3rd St
S 5th Pl
S 8th St
ke
Av S 12th St
e
S 10th St
S 14th St
ind
la
S 14th St
S 15th St
N Murray Ave
N Ardmore Ave
N Woodburn St
Lin
c
r
N Har
S 2nd St
S 4th St
S 6th St
S 9th St
S 11th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th St W
S 16th St
S 17th St
I-94
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
S 29th St
S Ma
rilyn S
S 18th St
S 16th St
S 22nd Pl
S 26th St
S 31st St
ST
u ck
aw
ay
Dr
S 26th St
S 25th St
Ln
Somers
et
S 33rd St
bor D
N James Lovell St
N 10th St
N 13th St
N 12th St
N 15th St
N 16th St
S 18th St
S 18th St
S 19th St
S 20th St
S 21st St
S 27th St
S 25th St
S 23rd St
S 21st St
S 35th St
N Poplar Dr
N 10th St
N 12th St
N 12th Ln
N 14th St
N 10th St
N 17th St
S 22nd St
S 24th St
S 26th St
S Point Ter
S 18th St
S 29th St
S 32nd St
S 34th
St
S 33rd St
ay
3
gh
w
Hi
S 39th S
t
S 37th St
S 40th St
N Cambridge Ave
N 12th St
N 14th St
N 14th St
N 16th St
N 18th St
N 18th St
S 24th St
S 26th St
S 25th St
S Layton Blvd
S 28th St
S 33rd St
S 34th St
S 34th St
S 37th St
Co
Mu
m
s
sk
eg tock S 19th St
oA
Av
e
S 17th St ve
S 21st St
S 28th St
S 31st St
S 30th St
S 32nd St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 38th St
S 39th St
S 38th St
Sta
te
S 41st St
S 40th St
S 40th St
S 42nd St
N Lake Dr
N Tennyson Dr
N Bayside Dr
N Regent Rd
N Navajo Rd
Tree R
d
N Elm
N 13th St
N 16th St
N 15th Ln
N 18th St
N 21st St
N 23rd St
N 21st Ln
State Highway 57
N 24th Pl
N 15th St
N 17th St
N 19th St
N 21st St
N 24th St
N 22nd St
N 25th St
N 25th St
N Mohawk Rd
N Pheasant Ln
N Skyline Ln
N 11th St
N 9th Ln
N 9th St
N 8th St
Access Rd
N 7th St
N 7th St
N 6th St
N 6th St
N 6th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N 5th St
N Mohawk Ave
N 4th St
N 4th St
N Navajo Ave
N 3rd St
N Lydell Ave
N
N 2nd St
N Bay Ridge Ave
R
N
1st
St
St
1st
N
iv
St
Lydell
N
N 1st St
N Kent Ave
er
N Achilles St
ce
N Shoreland Ave
N Palmer St
N Hubbard St
nt
er
N Richards St
N Berkeley Blvd
D
N Buffum St
r
N Diversey Blvd
N Holton St
N Booth St
N Jackson St
N Idlewild Ave
N Pierce St
N Fratney St
N Cass St
N Bremen St
N Weil St
N Marlborough Dr
N Humboldt Blvd

N Sunny Point Rd
N Glen Park Rd
N 21st St
N 20th St
N 22nd St
N 22nd St
N 24th St
N 24th Pl
N 23rd St
N 25th St
N 27th St
N 26th St
N 26th St
N 28th Pl
N Spruce Rd
N River Rd
Dr
ide
N Baker Rd
N 24th St
N 24th St
N 28th St
N 30th St
N 32nd St
N 31st St
N 30th St
N 29th St
N 28th St
N 31st St N 31st St
N 34th St
S 40th St
S 38th St
S 38th St
S 37th St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 43rd St
N Lake Shore Dr
N San Marino Dr
Grasslyn Rd
NW
ay
s
N Crestwood Dr
N Flint Rd
N Bethmauer Ln
N 25th St
N 31st St
N 29th St
N 27th St
N 32nd St
N 33rd St
N 35th St
N 35th St
N 36th St
N 34th St
N 37th St

N 37th Pl
N 37th St
Beechwood Dr
Oriole Ln
Stratford Pl
N Dean Ct
N Braeburn Ln
N Bethmaur Ln
N Seville Ave
N 34th St N 34th St
N 36th St
N 37th St
N 36th St
N 36th St
N 38th St
N 39th St
N 40th St
N 38th St
N 42nd St
S 43rd St
Miller Park Way
N Pheasant Ln
NP
elic
an
L
N 35th St
N 38th St
N 39th St
N 42nd Pl
N Sherman Blvd
N Grant Blvd
N 44th St
S 45th St
S 46th St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
I-43
N Chadwick Rd
N 40th St
N 40th St
N 41st St
N Sherman Blvd
N 42nd Pl
N 42nd St
N 41st St
N 40th St
N 39th St
N 44th St
N 47th St
S 47th St
S 47th St
S 47th St
S 48th St
Mulberry Dr
S 51st St
y
Eas
twa
N Oriole Ln
lac L
Charter M
al
N Range Line Rd
Valley Hill Dr
er Ct
Upper River Ct
N Upper River Rd
N River Bend Ct
N Valley Hill Rd
N Range Line Rd
Gazebo Hill Pky
N 41st St
N 43rd St
N 43rd St
N 42nd St
N 44th St
N 46th St
N 46th St
N 48th St
S 49th St
S 53rd St
S 52nd St
S 60th St
Dr
field
Man
s
S 48th St
46th St
S 45th St
S 45th St
S 44th St
S 64th St
S 62nd St
N 45th St
N 47th St
N 49th St
N 50th St
N 50th Pl N 50th Pl
N
Alo
is
St
S 51st St
S 52nd St
S 51st St
S 55th St
S 57th St
S 58th St
S 63
S 53rd St
S 54th St
S 57th St
S 58th St
rd S
t
St
S 65th
N 45th St
N 47th St
N 49th St
N 48th St
N 49th St
N 47th St
N 50th St
N 52nd St
S 56th St
S 58th St
S 59th St
S 61st St
S 64th
N 42nd St
N 52nd St
N 51st Blvd
N 53rd St
S 60th St
S Ha
wley
Rd
S 63rd St
S 62nd St
S 64th St
S 66th St
S 65th St
St
S 63rd St
WP
a rk R
S 62nd St
d
S 67th Pl
S 67th St
S 67th St
S 68th St
N Kilde
Service Rd
N 51st Blvd
N Presidio Dr
N 54th St
N 54th St
N 55th St
N 54th St
N 56th St
N 54th St
ley Rd
N Haw
N 60th St
N 62nd St
N 64th St
S 65th St
S 66th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
Azale
aC
N Li
Justin Dr
Riverland Rd
N Canterbury Dr
N River Rd
N Arbon Dr
N 49th St
N 47th St
N 46th St
N 45th St
N 44th St
N 51st St
N Link Pl
N 57th St
N 55th St
N Highview Dr
N 55th St
N 56th St
N 55th St
N 56th St
N 56th St
N 59th St
N 58th St
N 59th St
ir
Washington
C
S 71st St
S 71st St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 72nd St
N Fieldwood Rd
N Madero Dr
r Austin Ave
N Countr
N Riebs Ln
N 55th St
N 59th St
N 59th St
N 58th St
N 58th St
N 58th St
N 57th St
N 58th Blvd
N 62nd St
N 68th St
NS
hole
N 66th St
s Av
e
NC
arlto
n
P
l
N 63rd St
N 61st St
N 61st St
N 67th St
N 70th St
St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 74th St
S 79th St
N Le Mont Blvd
Baehr Rd
N Bethanne Dr
N 62nd St
N 60th St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 60th St
N 61st St
N 60th St
N 67th St
N 64th St
N 69th St
N 69th St
N 71st St
N Lefeber Ave
N 73rd St
N 72nd St
S 75th St
S 75th St
S 77th St
S 80th St
S 82nd St
S 81st St
y View D
N Eastgate Dr
Industrial Dr
ura L
n
N Ma
N 63rd St
N 64th St
N 63rd St
N 63rd St
N 65th St
N 68th St
N 67th St
N 71st St
N 74th St
N7
4th
N 75th St
N 78th St N 78th St
S 79th St
S 81st St
S 82nd St
S 83rd St
S 84th St
Lake Shore Dr
d
Gre
en B
ay R
S Main St
S Orchard St
N Buntrock Ave
N 66th St
N 66th St
N 67th St
N 69th St
N 71st St
N 74th S
t
N 75th St
N 78th St
Day Ct
ey Cre
ek Pky
N Hon
S 83rd St
Av
e
di
ck
S 91st Pl
S 92nd St
ie L
n
SB
onn
S 76th St
S 86th St
S 80th St
S 88th St
S 90th St
Bu
r
S 92nd St
S 93rd St
S 94th St
S 82nd St
S 89th St
S 91st St
S 93rd St
S 93rd St
S 96th St
S 96th St
N 79th St
N 81st St
N 81st St
g Ave
Elm Spri
n
N 90th St
S 91st St
S 94th Pl
S 93rd St
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 97th St
State Highway 181
N 85th St
N 86th St
N 88th St
N Swan Blvd
N 95th St
Rd
S 97th St
S 96th St
S 98th St
S 99th St
N 68th St
N 64th St
N 77th St
N 80th St
N 73rd St
N 84th St
N 82nd St
N 83rd St
N 86th St
N 88th St
N 82nd St
N 91st St
N 89th St
N 90th St
N 93rd St
N 94th St
N 95th St
r
Co
lo
ni
al
D
N
Ac
ce
ss
I-894
S 101st St
S 101st St
S 100th St
S 101st St
S 104th St
S 104th St
S 110th St
S 110th St
N 73rd St
N 90th St
N 89th St
N 87th
St
N 89th St
N 91st St
N 97th Pl
N 99th St
S 102nd St
S 102nd St
S 103rd St
Oakbrook Dr
State Highway 100
S 112th St
N 72nd St
N Swallow Ln
N 76th Pl
81
st
St
N 86th St
N 80th St
N 78th
St
E
N 92nd St
N 94th St
N 93rd St
EK
N 102nd St
S 105th St
S 107th St
S 112th St
S 114th St
S 115th St
N Enterprise Dr
Wauwatosa Rd
Pioneer Dr
Av
e
ce
Jo
y
N 86th S
t
N 95th St
TL
LIT
Dr
N Pa
rk M
N 96th St
N 103rd St
N 101st St
N 100th St
RE
S 109th St
S 111th St
S 114th St
S 116th St
hwood
Riverland Rd
Ln
Cedarburg Rd
Hillside Dr
w Ct
W Rid
gevie
r
water D
N Bridge
Solar Ave
N Silver Ave
Vega Ave
N Swan Rd
N
St
N 96th
anor
N 104th St
N 102nd St
N 106th St
N 105th St
N 106th St
N 108th St
N Kn
oll Blv
d
N 105th St
N Mayfair Rd
N 110th Pl
S 116th St
St
S 118th
S 122nd St
N Windsor Ct
ER
RIV
Dr
Concord Dr
Foxk
irk
N 99th St
N 99th St
N 109th St
N 110th St
N 111th St
N 112th St
N 113th St
N 119th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S Nicolet Dr
S 116th St
S 124th St
S 124th St
S 128th St
S 127th St
S 130th St
N 115th St
N 124th St
Longwood Ave
SW
ilso
nD
Dr
S 117th St
Sheraton Rd
N 117th S
t
N Park Dr
N 122nd St
N 126th St
Burlawn Pky
Mayfair Dr
N 131st St
S Elm Grove Rd
S 132nd St
poin
te
High
N Faulkner Rd
N 107th St
N Lovers Lane Rd
N 119th St
N 124th St
N 128th St
N 127th St
Old Lantern Dr
S 134th St
N 87th St
t
hS
N 115th St
N 117th St
N 118th St
N 125th St
N 135th St
N 134th St
Loftus Ln
Nicolet Dr
N Farmdale Rd
NE
M E NO M O
EE
CR
Alquran Ct
N1
15
T
N 119th St
Park Dr
CH
DIT
N Fiebrantz Dr
Parkside Dr
Ash Ct
S Sunnyslope Rd
N Granville Rd
RK
PA
A
N 124th St
r
River Dr
Marach Rd
Campbell Dr
Lilly Rd
Oak Ln
BUTLER
S Sunny Slope Rd
S Meadowmere Pky
S Li
lac L
n
k Rd
S Glen Par
Forest Ave
S Small Rd
N Briarhill Rd
LIT TLE
Dr
N Council Hills
124th St
TZK
DRE
N 124th St
Parkwa
yD
Claas Rd
CREEK
t Ct
Silver M
is
S Fairlane Ave
S Brookland Rd
t
S 145th St
7th
S
S 14
S Manor Dr
CREEK
N Granville Rd
ONE
OM
MEN
Wasaukee Rd
L
NE
Dr
iew
Pa
rk v
Melville
D
Oakwood Dr
Stone Dr
N 144th St
San Juan Trl

Sauk Trl
Vist
aV
iew
d Dr
Dr
S Wildwoo
S Ronke Ct
S Acredale Rd
S Delphine Dr
S 50th St
N Fox Hollow Rd
Wasaukee Rd
Forest Dr
AN
Lilly Rd
Lone Tree Rd
Woodland Ave
Ter
way
Gre
en
S 159th St
S Town Road
S Casper Dr
Rd
CH
Fond du Lac Ave
NOR-X-
Northwood Dr
LY
LIL
Dolphin Dr
Highland Dr
DOUSM AN DIT CH
Pilgrim Pky
S Moorland Rd N Moorland Rd
S Executive Dr
Service Dr
S James Dr
S Moorland Rd
S Calhoun Rd
Honey Ln
Ox
for
Merrimac Dr d St
Ash Dr
N 149th St
N 148th St
N 147th St
Cla
re B
ridg
eL
n
Indianw
o
Churchview Dr
od Dr
Melody Ln
N 166th St
S Forest Ln
S 167th St
S 170th St
S 171st St
S 179 St
Henry Stark Rd
Held Dr
Norman Dr
Sylvan Ln
Northpoint
D
D
M
in
eo
la
N 161st St
N 159th St
N 158th St
Bradee Rd
Sm
ith C
Hillsdale Dr
S 171st St
S 169th St
S West Ln
S Michael Dr
Amber Dr
Neptune Dr
Ln
Elm
Countryside Dr
Pheasant Ln
Pilgrim Rd
Woodview Dr
Arthur Ave
N 167th St
N 169th St
N Calhoun Rd
Mierow Ln
Patrick Blvd
Woelfel Rd
Talon Trl
S Stigler Rd
SW
illia
ms
S Brennan Dr
S Racine Ave
Cullen Dr
Penn Ct
Le Ch
a
Norhardt Dr
teau
Dr
Coach H
Fiserv Dr
S Woefel Rd
S Cari Ada
m Dr
N 162nd St
N 160th St
Greenview Ave
Evelyn Ter
Lincrest Dr
Nas
ouse Dr
Tilton Ln
d
R
Eg
an
r
olli
ng
D
SC
SR
oun
tr
y Ln
S Johnson Rd
Badge
rD
Oak Ridg
e
Trl
Marcy Rd
Imperial Dr
sau
D
N Brookfield Rd
S Danny Rd
S 200th St
S 199th St
W Norwich St
E Eden Pl
S Iowa Ave
S Swartz Rd
E Wilbur Ave
e
Av
E Car ol St
E Holt Ave
E Morgan Ave
S Herman St
S Shady Ln
E Ohio Ave
sk
Ru
Ave
eld
ayfi
SD t
S
llen
SE
S Amor Dr
S Andrae Dr
Pilgrim Rd
Colonial Dr
Water St
Mary Ct
Shady Ln
Dr
son
Jac
k
Shasta Dr
Bexley Dr
Poplar Creek Dr
Catskill Rd
S Barker Rd
Sunnycrest Dr
Copenhill Rd
Pioneer Trl
Dr
Cherokee
WAY
Wagon Trl
Dr
Shady Ln
Allen Ave
Robert Ave
Wildwood Dr
Wilson
Dr
Town Hall Rd
Marcy Rd
Clover Ln
N Barker Rd
Derrin Ln
Elizabeth Ct
N Janacek Rd
Rd
Ch
ea
ne
y
Ava
lo
Ram n Dr
ona
Rd
Preserve Pky
Western Ave
Kurt Dr
r
yne
D
Bisc
a
Division Rd
Joper
R
Bancroft Dr
Pre
mie
r Ln
To
we
rR
d
Nigbor
Orchard Dr
Maple Rd
N Willow Ln
N Lannon Rd
Martha Ln
Springdale Rd
Elmwood Dr
Misty Ln
Jaclyn Dr
Ln
oo
d
Fo
xw
Knollwood Dr
R
VE
RI
Fawn Ln
Woodside Ln
Well
ingto
n Dr
One Mile Rd
Town Line Rd
Catherine Ct
Dr
Lannon Rd
Lynwood Dr
view
We
st
Ln
Ave
Mary Buth Ln
County Highway G
EE
ON
Stonewood Dr
EN
M
16
7
ay
gh
w
Hi
St
at
e
La
nn
on
Lannon Rd
r
ies
D
Dav
Dr
Villag
e
Sussex Rd
Wilhar Rd
Tre
e
Lon
e
N Davis Rd
Country Aire Dr
r
Lan
cel
ot D
River Ln
OM
Shadow Wood Dr
Hilltop Dr
Rd
Town Line Rd
Elmwood Rd
Tamarack Rd
F
Longv riess Pl
iew R
d
McCormick Dr
Merkel Dr
Fox Ln
Ln
Sp
ri n
gh
ill
Ln
Oa
k
Whitehorse Dr
Colgate Rd
Pleasant View Dr
Maple Rd
Scott Ln
Goldendale Rd
N Town Line Rd
Amy Belle Rd
Amy Belle Ln
ir
Squire Dr
Robinhood Dr
S Mayfield Rd
Rocky Ln
Shadow Ln
Spuda Dr
Oak Dr
Maple Dr
Jordan
C
Colgate Rd
S Springdale Rd
Dr
e
or
Sh t
S ior S
r
e
pe
Av
Su are
S
w
la
De
E Pryor Ave
E Idaho St
W Tripoli Ave
S 5th St
S Valley Ln
e
r Av
otte
EP
E Gauer Cir
E Oklahoma Ave
Access Rd
W Ramsey Ave
y St
E Homer St
R
Park
Ct
S Edinbourgh Dr
E Lincoln Ave
E Linus St
S Ba
S 5th St
1
ay 1
ighw
H
e
Stat
W Goldcrest Ave
Dr
St
E Montana St
E Dakota St
W Armour Ave
W Denis Ave
r
arbo
SH
Dr
W Martin Ln
S 7th St
Guthrie Dr
4
I-79
ar
W
W Allerton Ave
W Mallory Ave
rferry
S Ca
p
Ra m
S 5th
W Howard Ave
S 9th St
Dr
ay
W Goldcrest Ave
St
E Stewart
E Bay St
W Saveland Ave
S 7th St
reek
stw
Ea
W Parnell Ave
es St
E Jon
E Euclid Ave
St
ney C
S Ho
Ter
W Denis Ave
St
ri e
EE
t
rS
ate
SW
W Madison St
W Greenfield Ave
I- 43
Foxcroft Ln
E Chicago St
th
14
Ct
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
E Wells St
W Kilbourn Ave
W Eden Pl
S 15th Pl
N Astor St
ren St
N Van Bu
No
rth
N Marshall St
t
E State S
t
N Water S
N Plankinton Ave
Anitol St
St
S 14th St
Concord
rd
N 9th St
St
Park Fwy E Knapp
W Water ford Ave
S 21st St
ook
S 36th St
r
enb
Gre
S 66th St
rial Cir
W Vogel Ave
E Linnwood Ave
E North Ave
E
E Garfield Ave
W
oo
E Lloyd St
ds
t
S
toc
E Brown St
kP
rce E Kane Pl
e
l
m
m
E Hamilton St
Co
N
E Brady St
W Vliet St
W Holt Ave
E Hartford Ave
E Park Pl
E Belleview Pl
E Webster Pl
E Wright St
St
Hill
E Olive St
E Kenwood Blvd
E Meinecke Ave
lya
Ha
5
14
t
th S
Dr
W
eb
er
W Hadley St
ay
Butler Dr
E Chambers St
St
hw
ig
Tesch Ct
E Vienna Ave
E Locust St
ns
ki
op
S 23rd St
S 38
Milky Way Rd
E Capitol Dr
W Melvina St
W Montana St
W Bolivar Ave
W Halsey Ave
E Glendale Ave
N Morris Blvd
e
at
St
id
ac
Pl
S Impe
Hunters Hollow
xe
Pky
W Burleigh St
ve
eA
W Becher St
W Grant St
32 d
y
wa e R
gh hir
s
Hi
e Wil
at
N
St
Rd
es
ad N Newhall St
E Fairmount Ave
W Maple St
W Plainfield Ave
W Holmes Ave
lis
Pa
elu
E Henry Clay St
N Gordon Pl
State Highway 74
E Circle Dr
E Birch Ave
nD
ilso
NW
State Highway 164
E Silver Spring Dr
N Ironwood Rd
N 19th Pl
Gree
nbria
rR
Rd
gacre
N Lon
d
rd y R
mba
N Lo
E Acacia Rd
E Lake View Ave
W Lapham St
r
yD
wa
W Bottsford Ave
Ln
E Daisy Ln
N Park Rd
t
th S
St
Ln
Ca Downing Dr
va
lie
rD
Ln
r
d Rd
irchil
Rd
N 18th St
N 19
N 21st St
oe
ry
lin
g
Dr
N Fa
ss
Acce
let Rd
n Nico
N Jea
N Ironwood Ln
N 19th Pl
N 21st St
r
on
ru
N Point
Wooded Ridge Trl
Ln
N Pelham Pky
r
no
Ma
Waukesha Ave
lvd
aB
nic
Mo
Dr
ly anta
er
av N S
W
N Iroquois Rd
Ln
l
il P
Highland Ave
D
ke
La
ia D
ant
EW
ye
W Ring St
W St Paul Ave
W Arthur Ave
W Colony Dr
W Edgerton Ave
t
es
W Warnimont Ave
W Barnard Ave
land Dr
N Court
o
equ
NS
s
hea
NP
Ne
ve
rA
th Pl
S 61st St
W Cold Spring Rd
r
Fo
Cir
E Keefe Ave
o ry
WT
W Cleveland Ave
St
E Hyde Way
SOUTH MENOMONEE
W Florida St
MN-19 CANAL
W Bruce St
BURNHAM
E National Ave
CANAL
rk
Pa
sk
in
N Club
Es
tab E Hampton Ave
roo
kP
ky
W Brown St
W Galena St
m
Ho
E Good
rich Ln
E Day Ave
WD
e
W Gar field Av
W Orchard St
n
E Fox L
E Belle Ave
W Canal St
W Harrison Ave
Ru
E Bradley Rd
W Vine St
W Vliet St
W Arthur Ave
d
E Willow R
School Rd
ton A
ve
W Locust St
W Kilbourn Ave
W Wells St
an D
othm
G
ra
Dr
te
ex
Lori Ln
Dr
okdale
Av
Rd gview
N Pierron
on
ve
N L ara A
rd
NA
e D
e Av N
amp
W Mineral St
W Rogers St
an Dr
Sherid
N Spruce Ln
resta
N Bro
Woodside Rd
Ln
N Greenview Dr
N la C
e Ci r
Salem
Dr
N Shorecliff
D
olia
e Tre
stone Pl
N Haddon
agn
NM
N Pin
N Neil Pl
Dr
N Pine Shore
l Dr
N Atwah
rgyl
NA
Lilac Dr
tr y Ln
N Coun
N Valley Dr
N Grasslyn Rd
r
Shore D
y Pl
N 41st St
S Str
S 50
S 54th St
S 56th St
W Tesch Ave
W Bottsford Ave
N Glen
idne
NS
N 31st St
St
ins
pk
Ho
St
W
al
t re
on
M
Dr
W Tripoli Ave
W Leroy Ave
Dr
W Abbott Ave
W Burnham St
W Hayes Ave
W Van Beck Ave
eve
Gr
E Dean Rd
E Chateau Pl
W Columbia St
t
sS
W Pierce St
W Scott St
W Manitoba St
eld Ave
W Plainfi
Dr
W Dakota St
Dr
W Dean Rd
iew D r
W Riverv
e
e Av
Sall
a
l
W
W Abert Pl
W Clarke St
W Michigan St
W Clybourn St
W Mount Vernon Ave
W Montana St
d
lan
Mid
W Hadley St
Rd
oint
E Buttles Pl

Access Rd
W Mc Kinley Blvd
W Juneau Ave
W Highland Ave
W Highland Blvd
W State St
W Michigan St
W Oklahoma Ave
W Park
N 38th Pl
Pl
W Berg
e n Dr
W Lawn Ave
W Olive St
e Ln
yP
E Ba
State Highway 32
W Silver Spring Dr
W Birch A
ve
WH
E Ravin
E Ellsworth Ln
W Glen River Rd
W Bender Rd
W Keefe Ave
W Meinecke Ave
S 44th St
lyn
W Hope Ave
W Burleigh St
Pl
W Cleveland Ave
Av
e
Rd
E Fairy Chasm Rd
W Fairfield Ct
W Lancaster Ave
W Concordia Ave
Busse Rd
y
Pk
ir
nia Ave 32nd St

N
N Teuto
t
ns S
opki
Oakland Ave
Ln
an C
N De
N 38th St
urg Rd
NH
c
ar
on
Tenny Ave
n
ela
lighter
N Cedarb
Je
re
Dr E Juniper Ct
E Juniper Ln
E Ravine Baye
W Courtland Ave
St
W
W Glendale Ave
At
kin
so
n A W Ruby Ave
ve
W Cornell St
W Congress St
EK
Fil
lm
o re
Lake Shore Dr
or
Sh
N Lamp
d
Fairfield R
Ct
side
adow
tin
ar
S 46th St
ar
n
W Garfield Ave
W Garfield Ave
W Lloyd St
W Brown St
W
W
Lisbon Av
Sa
e
rno
w
St W Walnut St
W Galena St
Dr
lyn
od
Wo
W Acacia Rd
W Villard Ave
W Chambers St
t
N 50th S
E
CR
WP
u rd
ue
W Auer Ave
N 46th St
W
1 Miles
W Miller Dr
W Larkspur Ln
W Heather Ln
W Bender Rd
W Cameron Ave
W Keefe Ave
W Townsend St
ve
ic A
W Rita Dr
W
Northway
Schoolway
W Elm St
W Kiehnau Ave
0.5
Trillium Rd
Aster Ln
W Dean Rd
W Cherry St
N 54th St
S 61st St
EE
rtz R
Elberton Ave
y
rle
Mo
e St
eyenn
W Nash St
N 48th St
N Hi Mount Blvd
N 53rd St
S 57th St
ctr
Ele
W Armour Ave
Greenway
Edgehill R
d
N Me
N 50th St
N 51st St
N 54th Blvd
60th St
CR
el Ave
W Vog
St James Ln
Service Rd
5
14
N 57th St
Bobolink Ln
5
ay
ay
St
Rd
W Hemlock
W Vienna Ave
W Mitchell St
obi
le
dar Ln
W Woodbury Ln
W Douglas Ave
E Ravine Dr
W Zedler Ln
W el Rancho Dr
n
ar L
Ce d
E North Point Rd
Source: MMSD, River Revitalization Foundation,

and SEWRPC.
W Fiesta Ln
W Fairy Chasm Rd
W Concordia Ave
Pky
I-94
D
OO
W Stack Dr
W Leroy Ave
W Allerton Ave
hw
Hi g
N 55th Pl
hw
ig
W Grant St
Mulberry Dr
N Fairway Ln
te
Sta
N 54th St
tory
NS
W Norwich Ave
St
W Grange Ave
Dr
S Sunset Dr
2nd
S8
S Ku
Balboa Dr
S 113th St
Ln
Ln
od
wo
llen 98th St
S
SA
e
Av
S 78th St
S 111th St
land D
eek
D
ve
sA
sett
chu
rto
le
Al
WM
W Lakefield Dr
a
ass
S 94th St
t
S 99th S
S 88th St
t
th S
W Chapman Ave
iew
D
on
Pl
SM
S 99
St
2nd
Dr
W Waterford Ave
W Allerton Ave
nd
v
t
ing
a sh
aW
S 69th St
St
W Eden Pl
W Whitaker Ave
Gr
a
y Cr
W Leroy Ave
W Mid
MN-18
W Fairview Ave
Dr
W Crawford Ave
W Dosie Ave
ter Ave
Carpen
W
Pl
enton
W Madison St
S 75th
n
tto
W Wilbur Ave
W Waterford Ave
rth
Ma
N 68th St
S 78th St
ra
St
W Holt Ave
W Warnimont Ave
W Center St
W Kinnickinnic River Pky

W Bennett Ave W Bennett Ave
W Ohio Ave
W Waterford Sq
e
at
St
N 72nd St
N 76th St
W
W Euclid Ave Hone
W Morgan Ave
dD
elan
Dr
N River Trail Rd
iew
r
e
Te
Av
on
rd
Le
fo
ed
N Wauwatosa Ave
NE
S
MN-16
Westlake Dr
N Pearlette Ln
N 66th St
N 75th St
HO
W Hadley St
W Park Hill Ave
Pl
er
h
c
Be
lt D
ve
se
o
o
W Meinecke Ave
W Main St
W Dickinson St
er
re y
W Wisconsin Ave
W Lapham St
W Becher St
e
W Harrison Av
W Cleveland Ave
W Montana Ave
W Eden Pl
W Tr
Cedar St
W Madison St
W Hicks St
Pl
Martin Dr
W Chestnut St
Rive
r Pk
y
Maple Ter
t
ey S
earn
K
W
W Washington Blvd
St Jam Vista Ave

es St
l
tP
oy
Public Ownership
Mequon Rd
W Kenboern Dr
W Congress St
W Marion St
W Wright St
W Washington St
W Washington St
S 85th St
S 10
e
shir
St
t St
rk
wla
e Rd
S 89th St
iver
7th
S 11
Blvd
Dr
S 122nd St eado
SM
d
ar
en
S la Salle Dr
S Greentree Dr
Pky
rtland
let Dr
S Nico
S Cou
W Green Ave
Ave
W Mitchell St
W Maple St
Yale Pl
Milwauke
e Ave
Range Line Ter
W Ce
W Kiley St
W Stark St
Revitalization Foundation Existing Land Ownership
W Ranch Rd
W Rochelle Ave
W Ch
Low - Medium Priority Conservation Areas
Private Ownership
W Club View Dr
W Fairmount Ave
W Congress St
ilip
Ph
Woodside
Ln
W Calumet Rd
W Custer Ave
W Garfield Ave
W Lloyd St
W Stevenson St
yA
ve
W Sheridan Ave
W Chambers St
W North Ave
W Wells St
Ki
le
MMSD Conservation Plan

High Priority Conservation Areas
W Liebau Rd
River
W Glen Oaks Ln
W Hemlock St
W Tupelo St
rk w a
y Dr
W Bradley Rd
ay
W Monrovia W
W Florist Ave
W Capitol Pky
W Melvina St
ve
na A
Vien
Wellauer Dr
W Dixon S
St
W O Connor
S 87th St
SR
r Ridge
S Rive
s
121
Dr
W Ridg
S 95th St
St
S 121st St S
y
lle
Va
ham
W Up
Avon Ct
W Arthur Pl
N 74th St
Portland Ave
W McMyron St
W Walker St
W Rogers St
l
sP
ve
dA
oo
W Marion St
W Moltke Ave
W Center St
Ave
Church St Dewey
rw
Ha
W Spring Ln
W Woolworth Ave
W Pa
Dorothy Pl
W Thrush Ln
W Edward Dr
W Parkland Ave
nd
D
W Woodale Ave
W Green Tree Rd
N 80th St
Kenyon Ave
Rd
Ave
W Donna Dr
W Dean Rd
W Keefe Ave Pky
Livingston Ave
MN-17A
W Congress St
W Locust St
W Lorraine Pl
W Clarke St
N 93rd St
h St
N 95t
N 98th St
St
04th
S1
St
S 106th
R
er
th St
ollm
SW
S 119
nd
22
S1
n
Su
Pl
en
y4
wa
W Keefe Ave
N 84th St
Access Rd
S 106th St
ky
rP
Rd
ve
a
Ri
sh
ke
au
W
S Pohl Dr
er
at
Ave
W Upham
re
Dr
igh
W Nash St
Stickney Ave
Rogers Ave
W Woodland Ave
Hillcrest Dr
W Harding Pl
d
it R
o
l
Be
N 79th St
W Vienna Ave
W Chester St
W Adler St
aye
N 80th St
N 83rd St
W Melvina St
Jackson Par k Blvd
at
e
W Manitoba St
W Layton Ave
g
in
W Carmen Ave
W Schroeder Dr
W Douglas Ave
W Thurston Ave
W Thurston Cir
Rd
Access
W Sheridan Ave
e
W Sheridan Av
W
W Birch Ave
M
ed
fo
rd
Dr
Av
sa
e
o
nt
ra
W Villard Ave
G
W
e
v
e
rt A o Av
t
be
t
r
e
He alm
W Stark St
P
W
e
W
Av
e
W Hampton Ave
c
e
an
Av
st
e
n
g
Co
ita
m
W
Ar
W
W Ruby Ave
W Meinecke Ave
oo
dP
ky
N 67th St
W Florist Ave
H
e
Av tes
ett Sta
ck ed
Be Unit
e
Av
W
ton
us
Ho
t
0th S
ing Blv
N 91st St
N Hard
N 10
ot
Ro
r
Sp
N 70th St
Douglas Ave
Ci
r
N 87th St
ky
rP
ive
W Auer Ave
W Schlinger Ave
WH
v
ark
NP
Trl
W Bender Ave
ll St
Conne
eR
K
S
e
Av
W Brentwood Ave
R
ee
on
vic
Ser
CH
EE
al
ion
t
a
W Mill Rd
N Colony D r
hor
WS
in St
n
Mequo
W Clovernook St
W Concordia Ave
Pr
iv
N 104th St
St
Pl
tis
ur
AN
CR
W Hayes Ave
Ct
NI
ndu
Li strial
m
Rd
a
St
e
Av
te
ange
W Boehlke Ave
CREEK
e
Av
N 84th St
St
N 85th
Co
lga
N River Rd
N Ma
N Lantern Ln
N Servite Dr
nk
rba
Bu
WR
St
W Hustis
W Acacia St
Ln
W Ravine
Dr
un
R
r
ee
WD
W Wahner Ave
W Good Hope Rd
PARK
Service Rd
W Joleno Ln
Isl
a
Open Space Lands to be Protected

by Public Land Use Regulation
Surface Water
er F
ore
st D
r
W Sunnydale Ln
Donges Bay Rd
Le Grande Blvd
Riv
W River Oaks Ln
W Haven Ave
W Radcliffe Dr
tA
ve
Scenic Ave
W Hiawatha Dr
W Glenbrook Rd
W Clinton Ave
e
Av
N 92nd St
m
no
Me
N 107th
N 108th
BR
OD
W Lincoln Ave
W Woodside Dr
Rd
Av
e
N 97th St
Un
de
rw
W Arthur Ave
ac
m
to
Po
N 98th St
S
ay
N 113th St
TH
ERW O
W Becher St
St
w
len
bo
n
N 116th St
SO U
UND
S Alfred St
W Rogers St
Be
rl i
n
sn
o
Po
r
fD
ol
W Mulberry Dr
W Elmdale Rd
W Willow Rd
St
Ave
rch
WA
Dr
Freistadt Rd
W Westfield Rd
W Darnel Ave
W Denver Ave
l
den P
W Ar
W Lawrence Ave
Ridge Blvd
ky
er P
W Mitchell St
ale
Ct
NG
N 116th St
Kenmar Rd
W Lapham St
W Edgerton Ave
Ne
w
Fr
e
State Highway 190
Lis
rne Ct
W Luce
Service Rd
W Calumet Rd
N 86th St
N 86th Pl
N 103rd St
N 108th
00
ay 1
Pl
W Walker St
A St
W Madison St
W Chapman Ave
N 94th St
e
Av
e
Av
ighw
on
Service Rd
W Hawthorne Ave
W Walker St
W Morgan Ave
a Cir
Rd
Ave
c
La
on
et
pl
Ap
te H
Sta
eR
D
W Dixon St
Ave
W Cold Spring Rd
Sunburs
t Ln W Bobwood Rd
Sth
1
nA
ve
W Hayes Ave
Rd
W Scarborough Dr
W Linfield Dr
W Bluemound
bor
sS
t
YES
g
ag
Fl
arine
D
N Ivy
W Lynx Ave
W Innov
ation Dr
W Potter Rd
W Wells St
yce
du
St
rov
ear
W Eden Trl
S Victori
By
r
Te
r
N 118th St
N 120th St
EE
G
Elm
d
oo
N 87th St
St
nd
Fo
St
N 115th
N 122nd St
Blvd
CR
s
op
sh
Bi
ll D
y
bl
n
An
N 114th
e
Av
N 120th St
e
Blue Ridg
Ln
n
Park L
Hi
W
em
W
Rd N
Pl
on
et
pl
Ap
ock
r
er
nk
Bu
clid
W Eu
W Wilbur Dr
oon
SA
Kn
oll
ish
WF
N Jo
le
vil
an
rk
Pa
N River Trail Dr
N Arbor D
oD
lyh
Hol
OO
c
Kis
W Grange Ave
N 129th St
Tru Ln
RW
t
un
Mo
l
al
Gr
N 111th St
N 124th St
N 131st St
DE
Sm
Rd
5
14
Manor Hills Blvd
N Lilly Rd
UN
r Ln
Lag
W Ohio Dr
W Crawford Dr
Crimson Ln
W Howard Ave
W Maple Ridge Rd
unt
e
N O Connell Ln
ad
Dr
WN
Ave
nal
atio
r
D
e
g
d
tri
es
W
Rd
S
all
m
S
W
Ro
Ct
Oakwood
r
re Dr
te D
W Maylo
poin
d
l
e
i
WF
W Beechwood Trl
SH
r
View D
W Park
d W Cloverleaf Ln
W Marcia Rd
W Rohr Ave
y
Pk
alla
W Win
field A
v
ul Av
e
kR
o
nbro
ok
Grand Ave
E Freistadt Rd
Ct
W Riverland Dr
ton
ng
shi
Wa
e
Riverview Dr
v
A
e
W Grac
Elm St
Grace Ave
Grace Ave
W Donges Ln
WM
e
Av
ch
r
i
B
W
W Custer Ave
TO
elen
aC
W Hadley St
Ave
Dr
Park
W Honey Ln
W Park Ave
W Cleveland Ave
W Dakota St
W Meadow Ln
W Prospect Dr
W Forest Dr
W Lilac Ln
W Montana Ave
Dr Dover Hill Ln
James St
W Ferguson Rd
Paddock Pky
rw
ea
Cl
R
ke
3
I-4
Dr
Dr
Tulane St
W Forest Dr
ber
t
e rw
nd
WD
Tremont St
W Graham St
e
Av
oss
West Grove Ter
Myrtle Ave
Te
r
W Ruby Ave
N
A
R
W Clarke St
MN-14
Knoll Rd
Le
on
W Harvest Ln
W Center St
Gil
WD
ve
en A
a rm
W Keefe Ave
WH
br
o
W Kathleen Ln
W Tower Ave
W Dogwood St
NO
W Sheridan Ave
r
xD
le
WG
Ave
W Portage St
W Ka
WC
MN-17
Gremoor Dr
Walnut Rd
W Honey Ln
W Crestview
by
im
Qu
R
Mary
W Prospect Pl
W Rogers Dr
S 149th St
a Dr
W Daphne S
t
W Jon
en St
W Bobolink Ave
W Townsend St
MN-14A
James St
W Kostner Ln
S Parkside Dr
k
ar
e
at
St
n
ta
Ti
Rd
Franklin Dr
lank Rd
Virginia Ave
W Beloit Rd
W Beres Rd
Aspen Dr
Golf Pky
S 152nd St
ofs
Eg
Dr
S Martin Rd
Ct
look
nP
Watertow
Dr
ve
rA
we
W Florist Ave
W Peck Pl
Brook Ave
Nicolet Ave
To
W Vera Ave
MN-12
Lee Ct Laurel
Ln
Wraybur n Rd
Dunwoody Dr
se
Es
Rosedale Dr
Heidel Rd
W Pine Ln
W County Line Rd
W Juniper St
W Kaul Ave
W Stark St
Cresent Ln
W Lilly Ln
n St
W Greenwood Ter
W Metro Bd
W Colfax Pl
Elmhurst Pky
Juneau Blvd
Madera
Ci
Cir
rc
le
W Mount Vernon Ave
W Harcove Dr
W
W Chipmunk Ln
W Salentine Dr
ivier
Hi
lls
i
S 158th St
ll
Mi
Big Bend Dr
Ove
r
D
st
S 162nd St
W Hillcrest Dr
re
illc
WR
S Longview Dr
W Lawnsdale Rd
S 166th St
Rd
Club Dr
W San Mateo Dr
Dr
W Observatory Rd
ta St
W Ryerson
Victor Rd
Dr
Ko
t
hl
eC
l
er
a
Ct
nsd Lawnsdale Rd
w
La
W Dako
k
Oa
rt Dr
Froedte
Dr
view
Wood
W Glendale Dr
W Calumet Rd
W Bende
r Rd
Ruby Ave
W Ally
W Darnell Ave
W Fountain Ave
W Lake Park Dr
W Wirth St
n
ill L
Stanford C
t
W Heather
e
Terra Av
W Feerick St
Forestview Ln
Ct
W Villa Ave
W Bradley Rd
Mill Rd
Hope St
Victoria Cir
Rd
Robin
W Rogers Dr
lm
SE
S Carriage Ln
Brittany Dr
dg
e
W Ridge Rd
W Donna Dr
W Eggert Pl
de
Rd
Rd
r
ve
to
es
W
Woodlawn Cir
Kirby St
Ri
C
urst
Burnet St
h
Pine
Tremont St
Ranch Rd
Waynescott Rd
ee
Judith Ln
Brentwood Dr
Newell Dr
Hyland Dr
Dr
ts Dr
D
ood
Golf Pky
Ln
Deerpark
Lillian Rd
Heigh
W Lilly
Tr
m
El
y Ln
E Rockwa
Ter
Leon
Ct
Ruby Ln
Ln
ily
an
nD
r
Kat Dr
aD
r
MN-13A
Vera Ln
Sunnyview Ln
Patricia Ln
Av
e
wC
r
Poplar D
W Donges Bay Rd
MN-11
W Heather Ave
W Carmen Ave
Thurston Ave
Carmen Ave
W Silver Spring Rd
Silver Spring Dr
tw
Wes
Mayer Ln
Ct
Ma
r
arie Ct
Jean M
Civic Dr
Kin
g
Br
oj
Ln
Siesta
La
c
Daylily Dr
Hampton Ave
r
ry D
MN-13
du
Woodland Pl
uer Dr
Kevena
Cedar Dr
Pky
Alta Louise
Ho
P
lly heas
an
Ln
tD
Fo
nd
Field D
State Highway 100
Rd
17
5
Fairmount Ave
W Burleigh Blvd
Dr
aria
ta M
San
Pomona Rd
Fronta
ge Rd
e
in
ac
Rd
W Coffee Rd
r
nbe
Tur
Luella
Dr
ay
Nicolet Ct
Lancaster Ave
ills Dr
n
on L
gh
w
Invery Dr
Hidden H
h
Bre
Roosevelt Ave
S Willow R
Brook Ln
Kodiak Trl
Helene Dr
W
W Lincoln Ave
r
eh
W
Dr
igan
Harr n Ct
le
Cul
Burleigh Pl
W Rogers Dr
W We
st Ln
W Barton Rd
Shagbark Ln w
Vie
dow
Mea
Beaufort Dr
Arroyo Rd
y Ln
Du
blin
Vernon Dr
e
Wisconsin Av
S Heide
w
vie
th
Mar
MN-8
r
ill D
erh
Ov
Brookhill Dr
a Dr
Brooklawn Dr
Evergree
n
r
ood D
W Norwood Dr
t St
Patti Ln
S Nor w
Dr
Edmonton Ln
Dr
Beeheim Rd
ll
Hi
Mountain Dr
Cir
Foxkirk Dr
urn
Aub
Tansdale Rd
ay
nW
hor ne Ln
t
y
r
Ba
bou
Ash
W Pinecrest Ln
W Southview Ln
rs
ffe
Je
Sunridge Dr
ra
Ventu
Follett Dr
Stonehedge Dr
Davidson Rd
Crestview Dr
nd
Dr
Dane Ct
Emerald Dr
Ave
ur
W Co
dla
oo
W
Woodside Rd
Wisconsin Ave
Briar Ridge Dr
n
Merlin L
Partridge Ln
Indian Trl
Pl
gham
Buckin
Black Forest Dr
Marcus Dr
idge
st
W
ay
l Ln
d Hil
Quinn Rd
Ta
Harvest Ln
Ln
nie
Bon
r
ck D
mara
W Corporate Dr
Hi R
El Rio Dr
ak Ln
Lone O
County Highway K
Eldorado Dr
Gebhardt Rd
Timberline Dr
S Hanke Dr
ve
eA
County Highway I
Pe
nh
ur
Ln
cin
Ra
Sweetbriar Dr
Blackhawk Trl
rd
Wexfo
Jills Dr
on D
ingt
n
e
B
Brian Dr
r
Dr a Te
ll
Vi
Dover Dr
n
Lege
it
Summ
E Broadway St
Hinsdale Rd
tD
Sunse
Kossow Rd
Harris Dr
Warwick Dr
W Downie Rd
Goetz Dr
Pearl St
Av
e
Anoka Ave
Lincoln Ave
Surrey Ln
Tanala Dr
Hunters Run
Dr
dale
D
State Highway 59
Rempe Dr
Ra
cin
Sultan St
Perkins Ave
Ellis St
t
in S
Ma
D
ark
kP
Swenson Dr
Belgren Rd
Coral Dr
e
nal Av
Natio
e
n Av
cadia
o
Bro
Alta Vista Dr
Killarney Way
Larkspur Dr
Highland Pass
l Rd
t
er
Lib
t
yC
Countr
Bolter Ln
Midland Pl
W North Ave
Independence Dr
r
Sierra D
Gree
n
Dr
Honeysuckle Ln
t Ln
Hoffman Ave
w Dr
Maraljo Dr
wn
Ac
ce
Rd
d
ss
Bluemoun
W
Dr
t
Niagara S
nD
yn
yL
Ruben Dr
Nike
es
Stat
nited
Enterprise Ave
Dora
n Rd
k Ln
kla
Par
Wolf Rd
Dr
r
ust D
Stard
18
way
High
ky
Richland P
ky
wP
Cardinal
Saratoga Rd
ld Ln
Wynfie
vie
ge
Rid
Red Fox Dr
I-94
t Dr
n Dr
Tennyso
Woodch
uc
r
Ma
Bluem
ound
R
Bar
tlet
Rivervie
Brookdale Dr
Ann Rita Dr
Astolat Dr
Coventry Dr
Jericho Dr
Johns
o
St
d Nancy Ct
ry
er
Rd
Joseph Rd
Ln
Ave
Almesbury
ul
Pa
Ln
n
nt
ood L
mo
k
Oa
d Ln
o
o
Glenw
re s
Wilderness Way
River Rd
rb
Ba
Kathryn Ct
gw
Burnin
Pa
ri s
h
Ln
Estate Cir
Burleigh Rd
Rd
Ln
Green Rd
Ln
ay
Gatew
D
Intertech
M
em
or
Sh
ad
yL
n
Marjea
Lisa Ln
D
sa
Me
Fair Oak Pky
Redvere Dr
Ridgeview Dr
Primrose Ln
Abb
ey
Glacier Pky
eC
Azure Ln
Dr
d
d
ina R
Gum
Meadowood
nR
Cherokee
ille R
Dr
Roundy
Wa
ter
tow
Danbur y Dr
m
So
ers
L
et
Ma
pl
Xin
wood
Creek
Meadow View
Ashford Ln
e Dr
Scott
Ln
Whitetail Run
Wessex Dr
tta
Joe
Dr
Wood
County Highway VV
Dr
Carol Dr
Ridge
Dr
W Holly Rd
W County Line Rd
NS
th
14
5
Brookside D
r
Wigwam Dr
e
v
aul A
Boboli K
nk Av
e
l
Kendel P
ood Dr
MN-7
Hi
n
Jerry L
Cedar Ridge
er R
d
lainv
Dup
yR
alle
gV
Ridgew
Northwood Dr
Riv
Ln
St
at
e
e Dr
Verde Ln
n
ga
Lo
Kohler Ln
St
Le
on
Dr
Woodland Dr
Dr
thorn
Beac
on
Prudence Dr
Bette Dr
D
rta
be
Ro
Rd
Lon
Terra
c
Eileen Ave
Kathrn Ave
Bonnie Ln
Albert Pl
ce
Spru
Warren St
State Highway 100
p Dr
Hillto
Stonewood Dr
Edelweiss Ln
Claremore Cir
Vir ginia Ln
Weyer Rd
Ct
Hi Tech Dr
sha
Wauke
Be
av
er
kD
Butternut Rd
r
Colony Rd
Haw
State Highway 190
Sherwood
D
y Wa
y
County Line Rd
Patrita Dr
Ma
nh
att
an
Sunny D
ale
r
nD
MN-6
County Line Rd
Rainbow Dr
Mill Rd
clyn
Ma
eD
W Sunnyvale Rd
State Highway 167
Brad
le
ln Dr
Linco
Ra
intr
e
Skyline Dr
Lindsay Rd
Linden St
Robinhood Dr
Ct
s Pky
Bonnie Ln
Ar
ss
w
Pa oha
M
ne
sto
ge
Rid
kD
Clover Dr
ld
Fie
Fairview Dr
Valley View Dr
r Dr
Antle
Ave
n
w
a
F
14
5
Mars C
t
ay
Donges Bay Rd
dW
ay
Tamarack Tr
74
ig
hw
t
Mill S
ay
WF
o re s
t Vie
w Av
Bel Air Ln
Ave
Grand
Dr
wic
Main St State Highway 74
w
gh
Hi
e
at
St
W Good Hope Rd
Dr
MN-9
Narrow Ln
Davies Ct
ilton
e
ndl
Ca
Saint
Jame
Na
va
jo
Sheridan Dr
Ham
Good Hope Rd
Elm Dr
Hemlock Ln
State St
ood
D
Santa Fe Dr
Ln
Plainview Dr
Willow Ln
ur
Lar ksp
Custer Ln
WE
dgew
Lyle Ln
Northway
School Rd
Concord Rd
Ri
ch
fie
l
Chestnut Hill Rd
tD
res
erc
ir
Menomonee Ave
Dubnicka D
St
at
e
Un
ite
Forest Dr
dS
tat
St R
es
egis
l Ln
ure
La
Hi g
Dr
hw
ay
Roosevelt
Dr
45
St Thom
Mar
a
s
D
r
yhil
Cle
l Dr
vela
nd
Ave
Duke St
Blvd
Park
r
Christman Rd
ld D
Kings Hwy
rfie
a
r
D
rd
e
G
h
Shep
y
Bluff Rd
Elder Ln
er Pk
Joss Pl
Riverside
e Riv
e
n
o
m
Meno
Tyler Dr
Ann Ave
e Rd
Ridg
Seneca Dr
Forest Hill Ln
Wooded Hills Dr
Keystone
D
Riv
C
nd
be
ers
Shady Ln
Dr
Jay
Susan Pl
N Ridgeview Cir
Old Farm Rd
e
Av
Revere Ln
17
5
Riv
Scenic
D
Wildrose Ln
ay
Destiny Dr
St
gh
w
Tours Dr
ott
Sc
Hi
Mequon Rd
MN-5 Hedge Way
Whitetail Run
Stoneridge Dr
St
at
e
Francese Dr
Elm Ln
Elm Ln
Pheasant Ln
Catskil
l Ln
nd
ge
Le
er Dr
Junip
Vicksburg Ave
Hilbe
rt Ln
Sylvan Cir
Ln
bury r
Ash
D
e
rn
o
h
wt
Ha
Lilac Ln
hway Y
N Lisbon Rd
Main St
W Freistadt Rd
W Cairdel Ln
ie
gev
Rid
N Whilton Rd
Mequon Rd
County Hig
Schlei Rd
MN-10
Rolling
N Brighton Pl
Carnegie Dr
nn Dr
e
Av
Hickory Dr
County Line Rd
Lovers Ln
W Chapel Hill Rd
W Ma
rseille
s Dr
Sh
W Madero Dr
er
n
Shady L
Existing Public Interest Ownership of Open Space Lands

Federal, State, County, Local,
Nonprofit Conservation Organization,
Lake or Sanitary District, or Compatible
Private Outdoor Recreation or
Open Space Sites
Proposed Public Interest Ownership of Open Space Lands
State, County, City, Village, Town
Nonprofit Conservation Organization
W Bonniwell Rd
Highland Rd
Oakwood Dr
Map 13
PROPOSED PRIORITY PROTECTION AREAS

WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
W Bonniwell Rd
N Ridge Rd
Edison Dr
ma
Klien
41
on
et
pl
Ap
ass
IL
CREEK
MN-2
Country Aire Dr
ay
P
ate
W
LO
Williams Dr
Fulton Dr
Morse Dr
Clinton Dr
Park Ave
w
gh
ill L
n
Av
e
Bunsen Dr Bunsen Dr
Hi
er
H
du
La
c
Highland Rd
Holy Hill Rd
nS
t
Hawthorne Farm Ln
Freistadt Rd
es
at
St
eg
Ston
ters
Hun
Fo
nd
Lovers Ln
d
ite
Un
Hilltop Cir
Mequon Rd
Highland Dr
Trl
Hills
ee Dr
Rockfield Rd
VE
75
ay 1
Me
ek
MN-4
Willow Gate Pass
Hawthorne Rd
RI
Dand
L
HA
T
K
N
DE CREE
L
GO
Lake Dr
Willow Creek Rd
Cir
view
Ridge
Dellwood Dr
State Highway 167
MN-3
ighw
Bark Lake Ln
Stonefield Rd
Plain View Rd
MEN
EE
eH
Stat
Hubertus Rd
Lakeview Rd
Bonniwell Rd
ON
Rd
Dr
Glacier
Bark Lake Rd
NCH
Cedar Ln
N Granville Rd
Rockfield Rd
Skyline Dr
S Shore Dr
MN-1
lf
Wo
Evergreen Ct
BRA
W Rockfield Rd
Polk St
NORTH
Woodside Ln
Industrial Rd
Cedar Ln
Lay
to
County Highway W
ay
W
Bonniwell Rd
Pleasant Hill Rd
County Highway C
Pioneer Rd
Springside Ln
eld
yfi
Ma
Pioneer Rd
I-94
W Washington St
S 79th St
rk
Pa d
R
S Adams
Ave
S Logan Ave
S Lenox St
S Quincy
Ave
St
d
r
Park Rd
e
u
a
E G E Gauer
Cir
Cir
S Pine
Ave
S Burrell St
S Clement Ave
S Logan
Ave
S 1st St
Sh
or
e
k
La
E Norse
Ave
E Grange
E Grange
E Grange Ave Ave
Ave
S Illinois Ave
Dr
11th Ave
e
ksid
re e
SC
S Barland
Ave
Carroll Ct t
kS
Tamaricac
H kory St
S Lipton
Ave
ic
inn
i ck
nn
Ki Ave
E Birchwood
Ave
S Packard Ave
0.5
S Troy
Ave
S Illinois
Ave
E College Ave
S Iowa
Ave
State
Highway 38
S 1st St
3rd
St
W Boden St
St
Be
n
S India Ave net
t
na
Ave
St
E Jones
E Greenfield
Ave
E Edgerton
Ave
ll
na
hit
S W Ave
all
hitn
S W Ave S Barland
Ave
E Rusk
Ave
E Oklahoma
Hi St
Ave
gh ate
ve
wa
st A
e
r
c
l
l
y3
i
E Ohio
EH
2
o
i
h
O
Ave
E
e
Holt
E
v
A
E Vollmer Ave
E Carol St
E Morgan
Ave E Morgan
St
E
Ave
Ave
s
E Warnimont Franci
Ave
Ave
h
bet
liza e
nig
E
E Saveland
E Av E Koe
e
Ave
Av
nig
E Tripoli
oe
Van
E Howard E
E K ve
Ave
ck
A
Be
Ave
h
E Norwich
E Norwic Ave
Ave
E
E Denton Ave
E Denton
Ave
EL
E Leroy Ave
e ro
yA
ve Ave E Whittaker
Ave
E Van
E Van
Norman
Norman
r
Ave E Armou
Ave
Ave
E Cudahy
E Price Ave
SW
hitn Ave
E Layton
all A S
ve Wh E Layton Ave
Ave
Av itna
e ll
E Somers
Ave
S Arctic
St
Ave
len
El S Iowa
S
Ave
S Kansas
Ave
W Edgerton
Ave
E Joseph
M
Hutsteine
r Dr
Iro
S Arctic
Ave
o
EP
Pa
rk
S Logan
Ave
S 1st St
S 2nd St
I-43
S 6th St
S 5th St
W Uncas
Ave
W College
St
W College Ave Ave
E Otjen St
Ave
tter
S Kansas
Ave
S Iowa
Ave
E Smith St
ger
bar
th
or Line er
T
tw S
en e
W Av t
S
S S St
t
r
4
S S St ClaiSt
I-79
ay
lair
r Dr
C
tSB
arbo t
S Logan
4
ay S
SH
I-79
Ave
yS SB
r Dr
arbo
ry Dr E Ba cess Rd
S HS Carfer
Ac
S Aldrich St
dale
ose
W R Ave
te
Sta y 38
a
hw
Hig
th
S4
S 6th St
an
ad
a
S 9th St
Gr
W Edgerton
Ave
W Abbott
Ave
o
ins
ob
S R Ave
W Cleveland
Ave
S 1st St S 1st St
W Becher St
I-794
KK-11
S 2nd St S 2nd St
RIVE R
S 7th St
S 18th St
I-43
Ct
S 5th
State H
ighway
ge
119
an
r
G e
W Av
r
i
W Grange Ave W A ay
W Grange Ave
KK-4
oW
g
r
a
e
t
C
W Klein
Sta y 119
a
Ave
hw
Hig
ion
itat
W Goldcrest
E C ay
W
Ave
W Iona Ter
W Upham
Ave
S 6th St
S 7th St
t
nd S
ey
on r
H kD
S ree
C
W Kimberly
Ave
W Mangold Ave
W Alvina
W Alvina Ave
Ave
W Hayes
Ave
S 4th St I-43
S 5th St Pl
S 5th
S 6th St
t
S 16th S
KK-5
S 12th St
S 14th St S 14th St
S 15th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 21st St
S 22
y
S Hone
Dr
Creek
W Goldcrest
Ave W Ramsey
Ave
S 15th St
Parkway
Parkway Dr
Dr
43
W Becher St
S 7th St
t
S 17th S
st
re
Fo me
W Ho e
Av
W Scott St
S Ace
Industrial Dr
5th
5th
794
794
5th 794
S Delaware
5th 794 In
5th 5th 794
ternation
Ave
al Dr
794
SN
S Indiana Ave
i
c
h
Ave
a
a
Indian
S
S Indian
o
S Illinois
Ave lson
Ave S Illinois
Ave
S Merill Ave Ave
S Robert Ave
S Elaine
14th Ave
S Barland
Ave
14th
Ave S Mc
Ave
Creedy
S Kingan
Ave
1th
S Packard
Ave
S Kingan
ve
S Packard Ave
Ave
Ave
W Bruce St
W National
W Pierce St
Ave
W Walker St
Acc
ess
W Mineral St
Rd
S Brust S
Kansas Ave
Ave
S Kansas Ave
S Ahmedi Ave
W Bruce St
St
11852289
3 II-4
S 11th St
S 17th St
S 18th St
S 20th Pl
S 22nd St S 22nd St
W Holmes
W Halsey Ave
Ave
W
W Edgerton
Edgerton
ton
W Edger
Ave
Ave
Ave
S 26th St
S 78th St
St
Oregon
rie
EE
S 21st St
S 24th St
W Grange
W Wanda Ave
Ave
S 22nd St
S 23rd St
St
hwood
W Birc
Ave
S 25th St S 25th
rS
ine
KK-6
S 24th St
W Lincoln W Lincoln
Ave
Ave
yes
W Ha
Ave W K
KINNICKINNIC R inni
ive cki
r P nni
ky c
S 26th St
S 28th St
ON
SM
n
sh L
arbu
Sug
r
gD
ge
W Colle
rlin Ste
e
t
rling Ct
S
Ave
rk Ln
Skyla
Teakwood Dr
S 43rd St
Ln
Ln
ony
Sax
W Ramsey
Ave
ILS
S 36th St
W Edgerton
Ave
S 31st St
S Ka
telyn
Cir
S Layton
Blvd
S 34th St
S 31st St
S 35th St
y
one
S H k Dr
Cree
ry L
Sur
n
tto
Su
e
sid
ke r
a
L D
t
S 45th S
S 48th St
W College
Ave
S 46th St
S 51st St
pia
ym
Ol Dr
y
Eastwa
Ox
for
Dr d
Oakwoo
d St
W Edgerton
Ave
S 33rd St
nic
nickin
W Kin er Pky
Riv
W Edgerton
r
y D Ave
S 36th St
tional
W Na
Ave
S 28th St
S 29th St
W Mitchell St
t
S 38th S
S 40th St
Ln
d St
t S 52n
S 54th St
EE
PARK
rn
bu
ad
er
Mill k S 43rd St
Par
y
Wa
S 46th St
S 47th St
LYONS
rle
Mo
St
S 60th St
65th Ct
S 44th St
S 46th
S 59th St
erial
S Imp
Cir
Sherwood
Rd
KK-2
S 57th St
Pl
er
re y
S 65th St
Millbank Rd
Mead Rd
W Edgerton
Ave
l
rP
he
c
Be
S 57th St
S 61st St
l
th P
Stu
S 65th St
S 68th St
S 71st St
S 74th St
Root
River
Pky
S 65th St
S 73rd St
S 76th St
r
Eat
on
S 76th St
Ln
S 76th St
S 76th St S 76th St
Eldon St
I-94
S 65th St
t
S 75th St
S 79th St
S 79th St
S 77th St
S 77th St S 78th St
S 78th St S 78th St
S
76th
St
S 77th St
S 76th St S 76th St
St
S
S
St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 75th St
S 74th St
S 74th St
S 73rd St
S 72nd St
S 73rd St S 72nd St
S 71st
S 72nd St
St
S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 71st St
S 72nd St S 72nd St
S 71st St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
S 69th St
S 70th St S 70th St
C
S 68th St
S 70th St
S 69th St
ro
St
68th
S
St
69th
S
S
S
68th
St
68t
h
S 67th St
St
cu
S 68th St
S 68th St
s
S 68th St
S 68th St
S 67th
S 67th St
S 68th St S 68th St
C
WK
S 66th St
S
66th
St
S
66th
t
St
innic
S 66th St
S 67th St
S 65th St
S 67th St
kinn S 65th St
S 65th
St
66th
St
S
66th
S
S 66th St
ic
St
Rive
St
65th
S
S
St
65th
S
r
S
65th
St
S 64th St
6
4th S
Oakwood Ln
S 63rd St
S 64th St
Pky
t
Middleton Dr
S 64th St
S 63rd St
S 62nd St
S
62nd
St
St
Sta
63rd
S
St
63rd
Sq
Sunset
S
St
S 63rd
t
Badger Ct
Hig
S 62nd St
S 61st St
Mansfield
S 61st St
h wa e
S 62nd St
Dr
S 61st St
S Ha
S 60th St
y 36
S
60th
St
S
w
S 60th St
Hig tate S 60th St
S 58th St
La
St
60th
S
St
60th
d
S
St
St
60th
h
S
60th
S
St
S 60th
S 60th St
way
S 58th St
S 60th St
ke
S 60th St
S 57th St S 58th St
S 58th St
36
S 57th St S 57th St
vie
St
58th
S
St
58th
S
St
S 57th St S 57th St
S Oak
w
Maplewood Dr
S 57th St S 57th
S 57th St
S 56th St
S 56th St
Ea Dr Lynn Me
S 52nd Pl
Park Ct
S 56th St S 56th St
St
St
56th
S
56th
S
stw R
St
55th
S
adow G
St
55th
S
ay d
S 55th St
D r re e
S 55th St
53rd St
S 54th St SS52nd
nb
S 54th St
St
S 53rd St
ro
S
St
53rd
S
5
1
ok
st St
W
S 52nd St
S 52nd St
St
52nd
S
S
50th
St
E
Te
lec
WM
S 50th St
S 51st St
S 49th St
S 51st St r
S 51st St
tric
a
S 50th St S 50th St
S 49th St
Lea ple
S 48th St
Av
S 48th St
f Ci r
St S 49th St
e
S 49th St
S 47th St SS49th
S 48th St
48th St S 48th St
S 48th St S 48th St
St
S
46th
47th
S
St
St
47th
S
S 47th St S 47th St
S 45th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 46th St
S 45th St
S 44th St S 45th St
S 45th St
St S 45th St
S 44th St
S 43rd St
S 45th St S 45th St
S 44th St
S
43rd St
S 44th St
St
44th
S
St
44th
S
S
43rd
St
H
S
S 43rd St
S 44th St
Miller Miller
S 43rd St
igh ta
S 43rd St
S 43rd St
S 41st St
S 41st St
S 41st St
wa t e
S 41st St
Park Park Way
St
42nd
S
y
S 42nd St
S 41st St S 40th St
S 41st St
36
Way
St
S 41st
S 39th S
S 38th St
S 40th St
S 40th St
t
S 40th St
S 39th St
Access Rd
S 38th St
S 38th St
S
37th
St
Sta S 39th St
H
S 38th St
igh te
S 38th St
S 36th St
SL
S 36th St
S 37th St
wa
S 37th St
or
S 37th St
S 36th St
S 37th St
h St
S 35th St
S 36th St
y3
S 35th St
S 35th St
S 37th St
Av ene
S 35th St
6
S 35th St
e
S 34th St
S 34th St
S 36th St
S 35th St
S 33rd St S 33rd St
S 35th St S 35th St
Somerset Ln
Av hea
S 35th St
S 34th St
S 32nd St
e
S 33rd St
S 31st St
S
30t
h St S 31st St
S 30th St S 30th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 32nd St
S 31st St
S 29th St
S 30th St
S 31st St
S 31st St
S 30th St
S
28th
St
S 29th St
S 29th St
S 29th St S 29th St
S 29th St
S 28th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
State
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 26th St
S 26th St
S 27th St
S 25th St
S 25th St
Highway 57
S 27th St
S
St
26
26th
S
th
S2
St
S 24th St
4th
SK
S 26th St
S 25th St
S 26th St
S 24th St
St
24th
S
S 24th St S 24th St
Ct
e
S 23rd St
S 23rd St
n
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S 22nd Pl
S 21st Pl
Av tucky
S 22nd Pl
S
e
Pe
S 22nd St
S 21st St
M
ar
S 21st St
S 21st St
S 21st St
u
S 20th St S 21st St
S 20th St
S 22nd St
S 22nd St
S
20th
l
St
St A ske
S 20th St
S 20th St
S
19th
St
S Aetna
St
St
20th
20th
S
S
S 21st St
v
S 19th St
g
St
St
S 19th St
20th
S
20th
S
e
o
S 19th St
S
S
18th
18t
St
h
St
St
St
19th
Blvd
S
19th
S
S 18th St
St
S 19th
S 18th St
S 17th St
S 17th St
S 19th St
S 18th St
S 19th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
S 17th St
I-94
S 17th St S 15th
I-94
I-94
I-94
I-94
S 17th St
I-94
S
S 17th St
15t
h Pl
N 16th St
S 16th St
S 16th St
St S 15th Pl
16th
S
I-94
I-94
St S 15th Pl
S 16th St
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl
S 15th Pl W
S 15th Pl
W
S
14th St
S 15th St
S 15th St
S 14th St
S 14th St
in
S 14th St
S 15th St
S 13th St
Av dla S 14th St
S 14th St
S 14th St S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
k
e
S
12th
St
S
e
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
S 13th St
S 11th St S 12th St
11th St
S 13th St S 13th St
S 12th St
S 13th St
S
10th
S
St
10th
St
S 11th St
S
10th
St
St
S 11th St S 11th
S 11th St
S 10th St
S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 10th St S 9th St
S 9th Pl
S 9th Pl S 9th Pl
S 10th St
S 8th St
S 8th St S 9th St
S 9th Pl
S 9th St
State S 8th St
S
7th
St
S 8th St
S 8th St
S 8th St S 7th St
Highway 38
S 6th St S 7th St
S 6th St
S 8th St
S 7th St
Access Rd
St
6th
S
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
6th St
S
I-43
S 5th St
S 6th St
S 6th St
S 5th St
St
S 6th St
5th
S
S 5th St
ss Rd
S 4th St S 4th St
S 4th St
St
5th St
St
4th
S
S
5th
St
4th
S
S
S 5th St
S 2nd St S 2nd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 3rd St
S 2nd St
S 3rd St S 3rd St
S 1st St
S 2nd St S 1st St
St S 2nd St
S 1st St
3rd
S
S
1st
Pl
S 3rd St
State
S
S 1st St
S 1st St
H
S 1st Pl
Highway 38
S 1st StA owell
S Burrell St
St S
ve
SH
Wa
S Austin St
S Whitnall
owe
ter
S
State
H
owell
Ave ll
S Austin St
St
Ave
38
y
Highwa
S Austin St
Ave S Brisbane
S Griffin Ave
Ave
S Quincy
S Griffin
S Griffin
S Mound St
S Taylor
S Adams Ave
Ave
Ave
Ave
S Aldrich St
Ave
S Taylor Ave
S Taylor
S Pine
S Pine Ave
Pine Ave
S
Ave
S
Ave
S Lenox St
He S Lenox St
S Logan
S Logan
rm
S Logan
an
Ave
Ave
St
Ave
S Clement
S Clement
S Nevada St
Ave
Ave
I-794
S Nevada Ave
S Brust Ave

S 76th St
S 76th St
S 75th St
S 76th St S 76th St
S 75th St
Stac
k Dr
KK-3
St
W Bennett
t
h
net
Ben
W
t
a
om
74
Ave W Oklahoma Ave
lah
S
k
Ave
KK-10 W O Ave
W Lakefield Dr
W
WB
R
W Euclid Ave
io
u
Oh
W
urd
W skin
Ave
Ave ick
S
Po
W Holt
e S t W Holt
W Holt
Ave
Ave
E Holt Ave
t
Ave
W Morgan
t
n
Ave
imo
ia
e
arn W Eden Pl
rg
at 36
W
o
e
St ay
W
Av
e
Ge v e
w
v
riffin
rA
gh
W A
SG e
ilbu
Hi
ale
W
d
Av
n
KK-8
W Crawford W W Do
Lyn ve
d
E Howard
W
ge
A
W Howard
W Tripo
W Howard
Ave
Pl
li Ave
Ave
KK-1
Ave
W Howard
Ave
W Van
E Norwich
Ave
Beck Ave
e 4
Ave
at 2
W Tesch
W Water ford
St way
W
Ave
Plai
E Waterford Ave
field
Ave
gh
nfiel
W Plain
Hi
d PA
W Leroy Ave
Ave
R
K
Ave W Bolivar
W Bolivar
W Leroy
KK-7
W Cold W Bolivar
W Cold
d
ol
e
C
I-43
Ave
Av
Cold
W
W
Ave
W Cold
Ave
Rd
g
I-43
Spring Rd Sprin
W Martin Ln
g Rd
Rd
rin
Spring
Sp
rd
3
fo
s
Rd
tt
Spring
W Bo
-4
I
Ave
rd
3
W Bottsfo
Ave
W Van
W Allerton
I-4
e 4
W Van Ave
W Armour
at y 2
erton Ave
Norman Ave
All
t
W
S wa
E Price
Ave
Norman
I-43
CREEK
I-43
I-43
gh
Ave
Layton
E
Hi I-43 I-43 Ave
W English
Layton
W
W Layton
Ave
W Layton Ave
Ave
Dr
W Layton
Ave
W
Layton
Ave
Layton Ave
Ave
S 78th St
y
ne y
Ho k P k
S 78th St W ree
C
S 78th St
S 79th St
ay
nw
e
e
r
e
W Grange G
gl
An Ln
Ave
Northw
ay
Northway
Enfield
Ave t
Con
S
ifer
n
Ln
o
t
s
Fielding
ay
Eu Darnell Southw
Ln
Ln
Way
Devonsh
ire
Ave
Overlook
D
Map 14
PROPOSED PRIORITY PROTECTION AREAS WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
Open Space Sites
Surface Water

1 Miles
Source: MMSD and SEWRPC.
Dr
E Dale
Ave
E Ramsey
Ave
WA
1
45
Map 15
RECREATIONAL CORRIDOR TRAILS AND PRIORITY

CEDARBURG
57
PROTECTION AREAS WITHIN THE MENOMONEE RIVER WATERSHED: 2009 R
43
Jackson
Grafton
Existing Public Interest

Ownership of Open Space Lands
32
MEQUON
Open Space Sites
Proposed Public Interest
THIENSVILLE
Ownership
of Open Space Lands
Cedarburg
Germantown
R
181
MN-1
MN-2
MN-3
145
MN-10
167
GERMANTOWN
MN-5
175
MN-4
MN-6

CO.
OZAUKEE
MILWAUKEE CO.
Low - Medium Priority BAYSIDE
Conservation100
Areas
CO.
TON
CO.
HA
57 Lands to be Protected
Open
Space
167
Surface Water
MN-11
R
32
RIVER
Trails HILLS
74
BROWN
Recreational
DEER
57
Existing Trail
LANNON
MN-9
FOX
POINT
Proposed Trail
R
181
1
45
MN-7
MENOMONEE
GLENDALE
FALLS
0
WHITEFISH
2 Miles
BAY
Source: SEWRPC.
MN-12
BUTLER
1
41
MN-8
R
74
SHOREWOO
190
R
190
MN-17
MILWAUKEE
43
57
32
145
MN-17A
UKEE
ELM
43
WAUWATOSA
MN-14
MN-13A
181
GROVE
Brookfield
18
MN-18
18
1
41
94
WEST
MILWAUKEE
MN-14A
MN-19
94
18
MN-13
164
BROOKFIELD
794
R
59
CO.
MILWAUKEE
NEW BERLIN
WAUKESHA CO.
59
WEST
ALLIS
R
32
100
1
45
MN-16
43
94
894
43
GREENFIELD
43
ST
24
24
R
38
894
R
36
R
119
HALES
GREENDALE
794
Map 16
1
41
RECREATIONAL CORRIDOR TRAILS AND PRIORITY PROTECTION AREAS WITHIN THE KINNICKINNIC RIVER WATERSHED: 2009
94
794

Open Space Sites
MILWAUKEE
R
59
WEST
MILWAUKEE
KK-11
WEST
ALLIS

KK-2
Surface Water

32

KK-3
KK-10
Recreational Trails
Existing Trail
Proposed Trail
43
94
ST.
KK-8
KK-1
0
0.5
ST. FRANCIS
Source: SEWRPC.
24
KK-7
FRANC
R
794
43
1 Miles
38
-KK-6
894
GREENFIELD
R
36
GENERAL
MITCHELL
INTERNATIONAL
AIRPORT
KK-5
CU
KK-4
119
R
36
CUDAHY
APPENDICES
Appendix A
LIST OF RIVER CLEANUP SITES WITHIN THE

MILWAUKEE, MENOMONEE, AND KINNICKINNIC
RIVER WATERSHEDS: SPRING 2009
87
2009 Spring River Cleanup Sites (thus far)

Saukville (takes place week after 4/25/09): Location TBD
NORTHERN WATERSHED
Cedarburg Village- Meet at Groth Design Group; N58w6181 Columbia Rd., Cedarburg
Fredonia/Newburg Meet at Firemans Park in Newburg. 450 Main St, West Bend, WI 53090
Lime Kiln Park (Grafton)- 2020 N. Green Bay Rd., Grafton. Meet in the top parking lot
Menomonee Falls - Rotary Park- Meet by park pavilion off Fond du Lac Ave near parking Lot.
N85w14199 Fond Du Lac Ave, Menomonee Falls, WI 53051.
Mequon-Thiensville (Village Park)- 250 Elm St., Thiensville. Meet at the parking lot near the boat
launch
West Bend- 400 University Dr., West Bend. Meet at the Washington County student parking lot
Kewaskum Meet at River Hill Park by the Pavilion
Town of Jackson - Location TBA
MILWAUKEE RIVER
Brown Deer Road- 8800 N Upper River Rd. & Brown Dr. Road. Paddle from Brown Deer Rd. to
Kletzsch Park while picking up trash. Canoe needed, must preregister for this site
Estabrook Park- 4400 N. Estabrook Dr. Meet at the parking lot of picnic area 6
Gaenslen School- Meet at the back parking lot of Gaenslen School on the Auer St. side
Gordon Park- 1321 E. Locust St. Meet at the parking lot next to maintenance building
Hubbard Park- 3565 N. Morris Blvd. Meet in the circle by the flagpole.
Kern Park- 3614 N. Humboldt Blvd. Park along the street. Meet at the pavilion.
Kletzsch Park- 6560 N. Milwaukee River Pkwy. Glendale, WI 53209. Meet at the pavilion on the east
side of the Parkway
89
Lincoln Creek- 5385 N. Green Bay Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53209. Meet at the Eastbrook Church West
parking lot
Lincoln Park- 1301 W. Hampton Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53209. Meet in main parking lot off Hampton.
North Avenue East- Meet on the north side of North Ave. next to the Hometown Gas station
Riverside Park- 1400 E. Riverside Place. Meet at playground by Riverside Park sign off Oakland Ave.
RiverView Dorm-Intersection of North & Humboldt
Rowing Club- Meet at the Rowing Club boathouse on Commerce St.
UWM Park & Ride Lot- 4300 N. Humboldt. Off Capitol Dr. behind WTMJ building
MENOMONEE RIVER
Krueger Park- 100 N. Columbia Blvd., Brookfield. Meet in the parking lot
Harley Woods- Meet at the intersection of Capitol Dr. and Menomonee River Pkwy. (off Hwy 45) on
the north-west portion of the intersection on the grass.
Hart Park - 7300 W. Chestnut St., Wauwatosa. Meet at the Park Administrative Building
Honey Creek - 135 S. 84th St. Meet at the CH2M Hill Parking Lot at northeast corner of 1-94/84th St.
Hoyt/Hansen Park - 1800 Swan Blvd. Meet at Hoyt Park Swimming Pool lot at 8:00a m
Jacobus Park- 6501 W. Hillside Lane. Meet behind the pavilion near the flag pole
Menomonee/Burleigh- Meet at Burleigh St. and Menomonee River Pkwy.
REI - Menomonee/Hampton- Meet across the street from Unity Church (4750 N. Mayfair Rd.)
Menomonee/North Ave. Meet at the intersection of North Ave. and Menomonee River Pkwy.
Underwood Creek Parkway- SE Parking Lot at Intersection of 115th and Watertown Plank Rd.
MENOMONEE VALLEY & HANK AARON STATE TRAIL

Hank Aaron State Trail Loop- Meet at the DPW parking lot east of the 25th St. traffic circle
Hank Aaron Trail Extension - 65th & Schlisinger Ave (between Hawley & 70th St)
Lakeshore State Park- Meet at Discovery World
Menomonee Valley Community Park - Canal St. under the 35th St. viaduct. Meet at the chimneys.
90
Miller Park- Meet at Picnic shelter #2

Sigma 13th & Canal St.
KINNICKINNIC RIVER
Jackson Park- Meet at the boathouse, 3500 W. Forest Home Ave.
Wilson Park- Meet on the east side of S. 20th St. at the pedestrian bridge
St Lukes Medical Center - 2900 W. Oklahoma Ave. Meet at picnic tables.
Other Kinnickinnic location/s needed please e-mail if youre interested in organizing a site.
Not on the main list:

Caesars Park: exclusive Miller site
A Corps Site-Men River Parkway-91st & Appleton to Dean & 91st
91
Appendix B
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

AND UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENSION
RESIDENTIAL YARD CARE FACT SHEET TO IMPROVE
WATER QUALITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
93
Rethinking Yard Care

A SERIES OF WATER QUALITY FACT SHEETS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS
wooden rain barrel was a familiar sight in many backyard gardens at

the turn of the century. Its purpose was simple collect rainfall running
off a roof and store it for future use. Often, that use would have been
watering owers and garden plants when the weather turned dry.
Turn-of-the-century gardeners knew by experience what chemistry teaches
us today: rain water can be better for plants than water pumped from the
ground or piped through a city water main. Its not chlorinated, uoridated
or loaded with dissolved salts. And, rain water is mildly acidic, which helps
plants take up important minerals from the soil.
The old-fashioned
rain barrel can
symbolize a simpler,
more sensible approach
to yard care.
Today, electric well pumps and city water pressure make storing water in rain
barrels seem like more work than its worth. Nevertheless, we might reect
upon the past and consider what the rain barrel can symbolize.
An old idea reconsidered

A rain barrel reminds us of a simpler, in some ways more sensible, approach
to yard care. It shouldnt imply that conscientious people must go out, buy a
rain barrel, and place it under a downspout. But there are applications today
of what we might call a rain-barrel ethic.
A rain-barrel ethic suggests an awareness of personal actions and
their effects on the environment, with the knowledge that simple
and natural methods are sometimes the most effective ways to care
for your yard. In practice, such an ethic could mean the difference
between clean and polluted lakes and streams.
The Yard Care Series
This publication describes an approach to yard care that is
both practical and environmentally sound. It offers ideas to
consider around your home and in your community. Look
inside for information on:
water quality problems originating at home

the environmental consequences of lawn and
garden chemicals
ways to reintroduce natural processes

practical tips for protecting water quality
around the home
Other fact sheets in the Yard Care and the Environment

series explain environmentally sound actions in greater
detail. In some cases, the suggestions can actually make your
property easier to manage or more inviting. All promote a
healthier environment and better water quality.
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
95
THE CONSEQUENCES OF MODERN LIFE
odern-day activities, especially in urban areas, have greatly disrupted

the cycle of water movement and polluted much of our water. It may
be a surprise to learn that many of the things we do in our communities
and around our homes can create environmental problems.
In the community
Removal of vegetation during development and its replacement with streets,
rooftops, and driveways has signicantly
decreased the amount of rainfall absorbed
by the soil. As a consequence, the amount
of water running off toward nearby lakes
and streams has increased dramatically.
Many sources of water

pollution originate right
at home. Fertilizers and
pesticides can wash into
storm sewers, which
carry the chemicals to
lakes and streams.
The connection between auto

maintenance and water quality can be
very serious and direct. Anything that
drips from a motor vehicle onto
pavement oil, gasoline, brake uid,
antifreeze can quickly be ushed into
lakes with a rainstorm. These materials
In addition, stormwater drainage systems

are typically designed to remove water
from developed areas as quickly as
possible during a storm. While these
systems are convenient for urban residents,
they also carry pollutants to surface waters
at a rapid transit pace. Contrary to
popular belief, pet wastes, oil and other
materials dumped into storm sewer grates
do not go to the sewage treatment plant,
but ow directly to streams and lakes.
Around the home
96
Many sources of urban water pollution

originate right at home. For example,
fertilizer and pesticides applied to lawns
in excessive amounts or before heavy
rains can wash into ditches and storm
sewers. These chemicals then travel to
lakes and streams. If used near lakeshores
or streambanks even in modest
amounts lawn chemicals may quickly
nd their way into the water.
are toxic to downstream aquatic life.

Downspouts positioned to empty directly
onto driveways compound the problem.
Similarly, leaves and grass clippings naturally contain nutrients such as phosphorus
and nitrogen. If leaves and grass are raked
to the curb, the nutrients they
contain can be washed away
before collection and end up
in our waters. Leaves and
grass can also clog storm
sewers and contribute to
localized ooding. On the other hand, the
practice of burning these yard wastes
not only releases air pollutants, but the
ashes can pollute lakes and streams if
carried away by runoff waters.
Clearly, there is a need to rethink what

were doing at home if urban waters are
to be clean and usable. Nowhere is this
truer than in our use of lawn and garden
chemicals. To understand some of the
problems caused by our chemical
dependence and the advantages of
introducing natural processes into lawn
and garden care, read on . . .
Dumping oil into a storm sewer grate has

almost unthinkable consequences. Five
quarts of oil can create a slick as large as
two football elds and persist on mud or
plants for six months or more.
Time to rethink
THE PANDORAS BOX OF LAWN AND GARDEN CHEMICALS
or some, yard care can be a very rewarding pastime; for others, it is

merely a chore necessary to protect the investment in a propertys
appearance. Regardless of motivation, most homeowners rely, at one time or
another, on lawn and garden pesticides and fertilizers. Unfortunately,
routine use of these chemicals threatens to open a Pandoras Box of
unintended environmental consequences. Following some common-sense
guidelines, however, will bring about healthy lawns and gardens and
minimize environmental problems.
Be wary of the chemical x

When the seasons change, you can
almost feel it in the air that urge to get
out and do something in the yard.
Unfortunately, what many people end up
doing sometimes leads to more harm
than good. Fertilizing without a soil test
when the lawn really doesnt need it,
using weed killers at the wrong time of
year, spraying with insecticides just to
be on the safe side, even watering a
little bit every day . . . are all wasteful and
environmentally damaging practices.
Without thinking about it, some homeowners reach rst for the solution
that should be a last resort. The serious
warning labels on many pesticide products
clearly indicate the hazards to songbirds,
aquatic life, and humans. In a sense,
using such chemicals without proper
diagnosis of the problem and careful
application procedures is no different
than a doctor prescribing medicine with
potentially serious side effects for a
condition that proper diet and moderate
exercise could cure. Resist the urge for a
quick chemical solution.
Develop a healthy respect

Because yard care chemicals have come
into widespread and routine use for
many homeowners, there is some danger
that a healthy respect for them has
faded. Homeowners may have used yard
care chemicals before without incident.
When pressed for time and confronted
by profuse label directions and warnings
in ne print, its tempting to skip the
instructions and just get the job done.
But pesticide application is not the time
to overlook something important. The

sufx icide means to kill. Insecticides
kill insects, herbicides kill plants and
fungicides kill fungus species. While greater
success is realized every year in
developing chemical and application
methods that are more target-specic,
the fact remains that pesticides
sometimes kill living things other than
their targets.
Consider the side-effects

If benecial predators (such as birds)
are poisoned along with pests, then
natural controls are gone, allowing
pests to multiply more rapidly.
This may further the need for
more chemicals and set in motion
an unfortunate and unintended
cycle. Thus the yard can get
hooked on a pesticide.
A similar pattern can develop with lawn fertilizers.
When careless fertilization
is followed by routine
removal of grass
clippings (a natural
source of nitrogen)
further fertilization is
required. The cycle of
fertilizing, rapid growth,
more cutting and bagging, more
fertilizing, etc. gets to be time consuming
and costly. It also increases the chance
that fertilizer will be washed off to lakes
and streams.
On an individual lawn or garden the
problem may not seem like much, but
area-wide it adds up.
Because yard care

chemicals have come
into widespread and
routine use for many
homeowners, there is
some danger that a
healthy respect for
them has faded.
3
97
Do it in moderation
Handle with care
When used in heavier-than-recommended

concentrations, nearly all yard care
chemicals can pose an environmental
problem. This not only wastes money,
but puts the applicator, family, neighbors,
benecial plants and animals, and downstream waters at risk. Many recommended
label rates are already liberal, designed so
that products still work under less than
optimal conditions.
An irony of urban society is that some

people are squeamish at the idea of
picking bugs off plants by hand, yet nd
it perfectly acceptable to employ
chemicals, some of which are hazardous
enough that professionals must be
certied to use larger quantities. History
has shown that some chemicals initially
believed safe have had to be removed
from the market after damaging effects
were later discovered.
Even under-application can create

problems. If label directions are misread
or pesticides are being sprayed about
in diluted amounts just to use up existing
supplies, then chemicals will not be
effective and needlessly enter the
environment. Also, pest populations
subjected to non-lethal doses may begin
to genetically develop resistance to the
chemicals designed to kill them.
Timing is everything
Using the wrong product, or the right
product at the wrong time, again wastes
money and needlessly releases chemicals
into the environment. If an insecticide
label does not indicate effectiveness
against a specic pest or is effective
only during a certain stage in the pests
life cycle then application can end up
harming the wrong thing (like honeybees).
Yet the temptation may exist when
product X is in hand now and worked
so well against another pest. However,
ignoring basic label directions such as
do not apply if rain is forecast will, at
minimum, result in a chemical
application that doesnt do the job.
Before using lawn and
garden pesticides, know
the plants, their pests
and the chemicals you
plan to use.
98
Another temptation exists during early

spring. A dose of nitrogen fertilizer at
that time can green up a lawn fast.
Peer pressure among neighbors to do
likewise may set in. Unfortunately, the
green top growth takes place at the
expense of the root system. An early
appearance of health can later give way
to a lawn susceptible to drought. The
response may then be more watering
(more time, expense and possible
problems).
Chemicals spilled on pavement during

chemical mixing and loading can quickly
be washed away with the next rain to
pollute lakes and streams. If not cleaned
up, a sometimes-severe health threat
may also persist. Fortunately, an impermeable surface can contain some spills
and allow time for clean-up.
Buy only what you need

Most people want to solve a perceived
yard care problem as easily and economically as possible. But buying ahead
is denitely not a good idea. Freezing
temperatures, for example, can render
surplus volumes of some products useless,
although they will remain hazardous.
Also, if chemicals pile up in a garage, a
temptation may develop to throw out
the accumulated mess. Proper pesticide
storage and disposal often overlooked
or the last thing considered can be
difcult to do right. Meanwhile, curious
children and pets may be at risk.
When in doubt, ask for help

Safe and reliable chemical treatment of
some yard care problems is denitely
possible for the informed homeowner.
The key is to know plants, their pests and
the chemicals you plan to use. Rather
than attempting to tackle a problem you
are not prepared for, it is always better to
seek professional assistance and consider
more natural alternatives whenever
possible.
AN ALTERNATIVE: HARNESSING NATURAL PROCESSES
he natural amenities that originally drew residents to some areas

clean waters and quality woodlands were often compromised as
people sought to embrace them. However, these qualities can be restored
by reintroducing natural processes into lawn and garden care.
The natural cycle

Consider what happens in the forest
environment. A layer of fallen leaves
helps reduce erosion by protecting soil
from the impact of falling raindrops.
Thats why, even after a heavy rain, clear

water is found in undisturbed woodland
streams. Natural grasslands protect water
quality in much the same way.
Leaves and grassy vegetation are
naturally decomposed by soil organisms,
which return nutrients to the soil. The
nutrients needed by plants are then taken
up by roots to produce new growth year
after year in a very efcient recycling
process. Under these conditions, plants
grow without the need for additional
fertilizers. Decaying vegetation also forms
an insulating layer of mulch and adds
organic matter which reduces daily
temperature uctuations and increases
the soils capacity to hold moisture.
and composting leaves and grass clippings,

the normal amount of fertilizing, watering,
and weeding can often be reduced. If
grass clippings are allowed to remain on
lawns instead of being raked or bagged,
they will produce benets from natural
recycling. Even pests become less of a
problem if more natural diversity in
plantings is used as opposed to typical
urban uniformity so that susceptible
plants are grown farther apart.
If you have natural or wild areas on
your property, think twice before
deciding to convert them to more formal
landscaped areas. Natural landscapes
often require less time and money to
maintain than formal landscapes, and are
usually the best at preventing water
pollution from runoff. This is especially
important for waterfront property.
Areas of natural
landscaping can be a
long-term solution to
yard maintenance chores,
and reduce the need for
fertilizers and pesticides.
A long-term solution to yard maintenance

problems, therefore, is proper planning,
especially, of landscape plantings.
This can reduce the need for
chemicals and increase the amount
of precipitation absorbed
by the ground. The water
that does run off is also
likely to be cleaner, and
the yard more attractive
and enjoyable.
Imitate nature through

planning and action
We cant expect that a natural
ecosystem can be duplicated in
the urban environment; but by
taking advantage of natural processes,
yard care can generally be made more
efcient and less problematic for lakes
and streams.
What works for nature can work for homeowners. By properly mowing, mulching,
Keeping in
mind the environmental
consequences of our actions and
taking advantage of natural processes
can easily be translated into specic,
positive actions around the home and
community. Some of these steps are
highlighted on the following pages.
5
99
PRACTICAL TIPS FOR CLEAN WATER
hether you live in the city or the country . . . whether your home is
large or small . . . whether you have a lot of time and money to invest in
your yard or just a little, there is something you can do to improve water
quality. The following suggestions are ways that you can make a
contribution to clean water and a healthy environment.
Around your home

s -OWOFTENENOUGHTOLEAVEGRASS
clippings on the lawn.
s +EEPFALLENLEAVESOUTOFTHE
streetside gutter or ditch, using
them around the yard as practical.
Properly place the remainder near
the curb (not in the street) just
before municipal collection.
s 0LANTANEXTRATREEFORMULTIPLE
environmental benets, especially
where it becomes part of a planting
bed or naturalized landscape area
that recycles leaves, twigs, and
other yard wastes.
s 3EEDBARESOILANDCOVERIT
with a mulch as soon as possible
to minimize erosion. Disturb no
more ground than necessary for a
project, while preserving existing
vegetation.
If you have excess
grass clippings, use the
clippings as a mulch or
compost them along
with leaves that might
otherwise fertilize
local waters.
s $IRECTROOFDOWNSPOUTSAWAYFROM
foundations and driveways to planting
beds and lawns where the water
can safely soak into the ground. Use
a rain barrel where practical.
s 5SELAWNANDGARDENCHEMICALS
carefully and sparingly. Pesticides,
including weed killers, should be
considered a last resort other
controls come rst.
s ,IMITTHEUSEOFTOXICORHAZARDOUS
products in general. Keep them
away from storm sewers, lakes, and
streams.
100
s #OLLECTOILANDOTHERAUTOMOTIVE
products preferably for recycling, or
tightly seal and wrap them for
proper disposal.
s 7ASHCARSONTHELAWNWHERE
soapy water cant quickly run
toward the nearest storm sewer,
picking up other pollutants as it
goes.
s +EEPCARSTUNEDUPANDINGOOD
operating condition. Check for
drips and repair leaks immediately
to keep nuisance oils off pavement.
Better yet, walk, bike or take the
bus.
s &ORWATERFRONTPROPERTYGROWA
buffer strip of dense, natural
vegetation along the waters edge
to lter pollutants and stabilize the
shoreline.
s )FUSINGASEPTICTANKSYSTEM
maintain it properly through regular
inspections and licensed pumping
every two to three years.
s -ONITORFUELUSEFROMANY
underground gas and oil tanks to
make sure they are not leaking.
s 0LANYOURLANDSCAPEWITH
environmental health in mind,
reducing the area that is heavily
maintained.
s #LEANUPPETWASTESFROMWHICH
nutrients and bacteria could be
washed toward lakes and streams.
s #ONSERVATIVELYUSESALTINWINTER
Substitute sand or old-fashioned
chipping when possible.
In your community
s 3UPPORTANDFOLLOWORDINANCES
that limit soil erosion from
construction sites.
s 3UPPORTTHEPRESERVATIONOFWETlands as natural lters that protect

water quality, prevent ooding,
and provide vital open space.
s %NCOURAGEDETENTIONPONDSAND
other stormwater management
practices that reduce runoff pollution by temporarily holding water
or letting it soak into the ground.
s 0ROMOTEhENVIRONMENTALOR
parkway corridors adjacent to
streams and waterways for water
quality, wildlife, and multiple-use
benets.
s %NCOURAGETHESAFEBUTCONSERVAtive use of salt on roads and limit

application to critical areas.
s 0ARTICIPATEINGROUPSPROJECTSAND
events that promote conservation,
waterfront recreation, or shoreline
clean-ups.
s 4ELLPUBLICOFlCIALSABOUTYOUR
interest in cleaning up local
waters and about their value to
recreation and the economy.
Home hot spots for water quality

Around every yard are spots where your activities affect water quality. The illustration shows a few of
them. Take a look around your own home with an eye toward water quality.
Good for water quality
Bad for water quality
Could be good or bad, depending on your actions
LAWN & GARDEN

CHEMICALS
TREES &
PLANTING
BEDS
LAWNS
NATURAL
AREAS
COMPOSTING
DOWNSPOUT
WATER
SOAKING IN
CAR CARE
LEAVES
AND GRASS
CLIPPINGS
OIL AND GAS

DRIPPINGS
PET WASTES
DOWNSPOUT
TO PAVEMENT
WINTER
SALT
BARE SOIL
RUNOFF TO
STREAMS
AND LAKES
101
PRINCIPLES OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND YARD CARE
ain barrels were used in the past to collect water for use around the
yard. Today, they symbolize a bygone era of sensible, environmentally
sound approaches to growing healthy lawns and gardens. Environmentally
sound yard care stresses:
s 4HINKINGOFENVIRONMENTALCONSEQUENCESINADDITIONTO
conveniences.
s 0LANNINGFORGREATERHARMONYWITHNATURALSURROUNDINGS
s "EINGCONSERVATIVEANDRESOURCEFULRATHERTHANWASTEFUL
s "ELIEVINGTHATLITTLECHANGESCOLLECTIVELYMAKEABIGDIFFERENCE
s #APITALIZINGONTHETIMEANDCOST SAVINGSTHATRETHINKINGYARD
care can bring.
Fact sheets in the Yard Care and the

Environment series are designed to
illustrate the principles of environmentally
sound yard care. They provide specic
information about pesticides, fertilizers,
landscaping, watering, and
related topics. These and other
publications can be obtained from your

county UW-Extension ofce. Help is also
available there regarding soil testing, pest
identication, plant selection, and other
important items related to yard care and
water quality.
This publication is available from county UW-Extension ofces, Cooperative Extension Publications
1-877-947-7827, and from DNR Service Centers.
A publication of the University of WisconsinExtension in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources.
Printed on
recycled paper
GWQ009 Rethinking
Yard Care
DNR WT-526-99
R-09-99-10M-30-S
102
Author: Gary Korb, UW-Extension

Illustrations: Carol Watkins
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. Send inquiries about copyright
permission to: Director, Cooperative Extension Publications, 201 Hiram Smith Hall, 1545 Observatory Dr.,
Madison, WI 53706. University of Wisconsin-Extension is an EEO/Afrmative Action employer and provides
equal opportunities in employment and programming, including Title IX and
ADA requirements.
Editing and design by the
Environmental Resources Center,
University of WisconsinExtension.
Appendix C
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

AND UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENSION
RAIN GARDEN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
MANUAL FOR RESIDENTIAL HOMEOWNERS
103
A how-to manual
for homeowners
105
Your personal contribution to cleaner water
omeowners in many parts of the country are catching on to rain gardens land-
scaped areas planted to wild owers and other native vegetation that soak up rain water,
mainly from the roof of a house or other building. The rain garden lls with a few inches
of water after a storm and the water slowly lters into the ground rather than running off
to a storm drain. Compared to a conventional patch of lawn, a rain garden allows about
30% more water to soak into the ground.
Why are rain gardens important? As cities and suburbs grow and replace forests and
agricultural land, increased stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces becomes a
problem. Stormwater runoff from developed areas increases ooding; carries pollutants
from streets, parking lots and even lawns into local streams and lakes; and leads to costly
municipal improvements in stormwater treatment structures.
By reducing stormwater runoff, rain gardens can be a valuable part of changing these
trends. While an individual rain garden may seem like a small thing, collectively they
produce substantial neighborhood and community environmental benets. Rain gardens
work for us in several ways:
Increasing the amount of water that lters into the ground, which
recharges local and regional aquifers;
Helping protect communities from ooding and drainage problems;
Helping protect streams and lakes from pollutants carried by

urban stormwater lawn fertilizers and pesticides, oil and
other uids that leak from cars, and numerous
harmful substances that wash off roofs and
paved areas;
Enhancing the beauty of yards and neighborhoods;
Providing valuable habitat for birds, butteries

and many benecial insects.
106
Who should use this

manual?
This manual provides
homeowners and landscape
professionals with the
information needed to
design and build rain
gardens on residential lots.
Guidelines presented in this
manual can also be used to
treat roof runoff at commercial and institutional
sites. However, the manual
should not be used to
design rain gardens for
parking lots, busy streets
and other heavily used
paved areas where
stormwater would require
pretreatment before
entering a rain garden.
Frequently asked questions

Does a rain garden form a pond?
No. The rain water will soak in so the rain garden is dry
between rainfalls. (Note: some rain gardens can be
designed to include a permanent pond, but that type of
rain garden is not addressed in this publication).
Are they a breeding ground for mosquitoes?
No. Mosquitoes need 7 to 12 days to lay and hatch eggs,
and standing water in the rain garden will last for a few
hours after most storms. Mosquitoes are more likely to lay
eggs in bird baths, storm sewers, and lawns than in a
sunny rain garden. Also rain gardens attract dragonies,
which eat mosquitoes!
Do they require a lot of maintenance?
Rain gardens can be maintained with little effort after the
plants are established. Some weeding and watering will be
needed in the rst two years, and perhaps some thinning
in later years as the plants mature.
Is a rain garden expensive?
It doesnt have to be. A family and a
few friends can provide the labor. The
main cost will be purchasing the plants,
and even this cost can be minimized by
using some native plants that might
already exist in the yard or in a
neighbors yard.
Rain Gardens A how-to manual for homeowners
107
Step 1
Sizing and Siting the Rain Garden
his section of the manual covers rain gar-
den basics where to put the rain garden,

how big to make it, how deep to dig it, and
what kind of soils and slope are best. Following
the instructions in this section is the best way
to ensure a successful rain garden project.
If you already know the size you want your rain
An extension of PVC pipe helps direct downspout water

to this rain garden.
garden to be, then skip ahead to the section

about building the rain garden. However, take time read the pointers about location, and
do nd the slope of the lawn. If the location has a slope more than about 12%, its best to
pick a different location because of the effort it will take to create a level rain garden.
Where should the rain garden go?

Home rain gardens can be in one of two places near the house to catch only roof runoff or farther out on
the lawn to collect water from the lawn and roof. (Figure 1 shows the possible locations on a residential lot.)
To help decide where to put a rain garden, consider these points:
The rain garden should be at least 10 feet from the house so inltrating water doesnt
seep into the foundation.
Do not place the rain garden directly over a septic system.
It may be tempting to put the rain garden in a part of the yard where water already
ponds. Dont! The goal of a rain garden is to encourage inltration, and your yards wet
patches show where inltration is slow.
It is better to build the rain garden in full or partial sun, not directly under a big tree.
Putting the rain garden in a atter part of the yard will make digging much easier.
For example, a rain garden 10 feet wide on a 10% slope must be 12 inches deep to be
level, unless you import topsoil or use cut and ll.
108
Consider your overall landscape

When considering placement of your rain
garden, design with the end in mind.
throughout the landscape. Determine how

far or how close you want your rain garden
Carefully consider how the rain garden can

be integrated into existing and future
to outdoor gathering spaces or other play

areas. Why not locate it near a patio where
landscaping. Also, pay attention to views

from inside the house as well as those
you can take advantage of the colors and

fragrances for hours on end!
Figure 1 A rain garden can

be built in the front or back
yard. Pick a pleasing shape
for the rain garden. Crescent,
kidney, and teardrop shapes
seem to work well.
rain garden
length
rain
garden
width
not within 10'

of foundation
> 30'
from
down spout
roof and lawn
drainage
area to back
rain garden
roof drainage
area to front
rain garden
close to
down spout
rain
n
garde
h
t
d
i
w
arden
rain g gth
len
street
109
Figure 2 Rain gardens should
> 10'
from
foundation
> 30'
from
down spout
berm
be located at least 10 feet from

the house, on a gentle slope
that catches downspout water.
close
to
down
spout
< 12%
slope
berm
street
How big should the rain garden be?

The surface area of the rain garden can be almost any size, but time and cost will always be important considerations in sizing decisions. Any reasonably sized rain garden will provide some stormwater runoff control.
A typical residential rain garden ranges from 100 to 300 square feet. Rain gardens can be smaller than 100
square feet, but very small gardens have little plant variety. If a rain garden is larger than 300 square feet it
takes a lot more time to dig, is more difficult to make level, and could be hard on your budget.
The size of the rain garden will depend on
how deep the garden will be,
what type of soils the garden will be planted in, and
how much roof and/or lawn will drain to the garden.
Guidelines are not rules
This information, along with the sizing factor from the tables on
page 9, will determine the surface area of the rain garden.
The sizing guidelines

described in this manual are
based on a goal of controlling
100% of the runoff for the
average rainfall year while
keeping the size of the rain
garden reasonable. Establishing a 100% runoff goal helps
compensate for some of the
errors that creep into the
design and construction of
any rain garden.
Digging with a rented backhoe.
110
If you follow the guidelines in

the manual and decide the
calculated surface area is just
too large for your goals, it is
perfectly acceptable to make
the rain garden smaller. The
rain garden can be up to 30%
smaller and still control almost
90% of the annual runoff. On
the other hand, it is ne to
make the rain garden bigger
than the guidelines indicate.
How Deep Should the Rain Garden Be?

A typical rain garden is between four and eight inches deep. A rain garden more than eight inches deep
might pond water too long, look like a hole in the ground, and present a tripping hazard for somebody
stepping into it. A rain garden much less than four inches deep will need an excessive amount of surface
area to provide enough water storage to inltrate the larger storms.
No matter what the depth of
the rain garden, the goal is to
keep the garden level. Digging
a very shallow rain garden on a
steep lawn will require bringing
in extra topsoil to bring the
downslope part of the garden
up to the same height as the
up-slope part of the garden. As
the slope gets steeper, it is easier to dig the rain garden a little
deeper to make it level.
downhill
stake
the string must be level
uphill
stake
width
height
Figure 3 The string should be tied to

the base of the uphill stake, then tied to
the downhill stake at the same level.
The slope of the lawn should determine the depth of the rain garden. Find the slope of your lawn by
following these steps. (Figure 3 shows how the stakes and string should look.)
1. Pound one stake in at the uphill end of your rain garden site and pound the other stake
in at the downhill end. The stakes should be about 15 feet apart.
2. Tie a string to the bottom of the uphill stake and run the string to the downhill stake.
3. Using a string level or the carpenters level, make the string horizontal and tie the string
to the downhill stake at that height.
4. Measure the width (in inches) between the two stakes.
5. Now measure the height (in inches) on the downhill stake between the ground and string.
6. Divide the height by the width and multiply the result by 100 to nd the lawns percent
slope. If the slope is more than 12%, its best to nd another site or talk to a professional
landscaper.
Using the slope of the lawn, select the depth of the rain garden from the following options:
If the slope is less than 4%, it is easiest to build a 3 to 5-inch deep rain garden.
If the slope is between 5 and 7%, it is easiest to build one 6 to 7 inches deep.
If the slope is between 8 and 12%, it is easiest to build one about 8 inches deep.
EXAMPLE
Todd measures the length of the string between the stakes; it is 180 inches long. The height
is 9 inches. He divides the height by the width to nd his lawns percent slope.
height
x 100 =% slope
width
9 inches
x 100 =5% slope
180 inches
With a 5% slope, Todd should build a 6 inch deep rain garden.
111
What type of soils are on the rain garden site?

After choosing a rain garden depth, identify the lawns soil type as sandy, silty, or clayey. Sandy soils have
the fastest inltration; clayey soils have the slowest. Since clayey soils take longer to absorb water, rain
gardens in clayey soil must be bigger than rain gardens in sandy or silty soil. If the soil feels very gritty and
coarse, you probably have sandy soil. If your soil is smooth but not sticky, you have silty soil. If it is very
sticky and clumpy, you probably have clayey soil.
How big is the area draining to the rain garden?

The next step in choosing your rain garden size is to nd the area that will drain to the rain garden. As the
size of the drainage area increases so should the size of the rain garden. There is some guesswork in determining the size of a drainage area, especially if a large part of the lawn is up-slope from the proposed garden
site. Use the suggestions below to estimate the drainage area without spending a lot of time.
Rain gardens less than 30 feet from the downspout

1. In this case, where the rain garden is close to the house, almost all water will come from
the roof downspout. Walk around the house and estimate what percent of the roof feeds
to that downspout. Many houses have four downspouts, each taking about 25% of the
roofs runoff.
2. Next nd your homes footprint, the area of the rst oor. If you dont already know it,
use a tape measure to nd your houses length and width. Multiply the two together to
nd the approximate area of your roof.
. If the rain garden

is far from the
house, and you
dont want a swale
or downspout
cutting across the
3. Finally, multiply the roof area by the percent of the roof that feeds to the rain garden
downspout. This is the roof drainage area.
Rain gardens more than 30 feet from the downspout
lawn, run a PVC
1. If there is a signicant area of lawn uphill that will also drain to the rain garden, add
this lawn area to the roof drainage area. First nd the roof drainage area using the steps
above for a rain garden less than 30 from the downspout.
pipe underground
from the downspout to the rain
as for a rain
2. Next nd the area of the lawn that will drain to the rain garden. Stand where your rain
garden will be and look up toward the house. Identify the part of the lawn sloping into
the rain garden.
garden less than
3. Measure the length and width of the uphill lawn, and multiply them to nd the lawn area.
30 feet from the
4. Add the lawn area to the roof drainage area to nd the total drainage area.
garden. In this
case do calculations
house.
EXAMPLE
Todds house is 60 feet by 40 feet, so the roof area is 2400 square feet. He estimates that
the downspout collects water from 25% of the roof, so he multiplies 2400 by 0.25 to get a
downspout drainage area of 600 square feet.
Roof Area: 60 ft by 40 ft = 2400 square ft.
Drainage Area: 2400 square ft. x 0.25 = 600 square ft.
112
Simple soil tests

Two small tests can ensure your soil can handle a rain garden:
Dig a hole about 6 inches deep where the rain
garden is to go and ll the hole with water. If
the water takes more than 24 hours to soak in,
the soil is not suitable for a rain garden.
Take a handful of soil and dampen it with a
few drops of water. After kneading the soil in your ngers,
squeeze the soil into a ball. If it remains in a ball, then work
the soil between your forenger and thumb, squeezing it
upward into a ribbon of uniform thickness. Allow the ribbon
to emerge and extend over the forenger until it breaks
from its own weight. If the soil forms a ribbon more than
an inch long before it breaks, and it also feels more smooth
than gritty, the soil is not suitable for a rain garden.
The map is a starting point for assessing what type of soils you might nd in your yard. However, the soil on a
small plot of a yard can be very different from the soils indicated on the map. Use the simple soil test described
here for a more accurate representation of the soils in the possible rain garden location. More information about
sampling and testing lawn and garden soils can be obtained at county UW-Extension offices.
Using the Rain Garden Size Factors

Having estimated the drainage area, soil type, and depth for your rain garden, use Table 1 or Table 2 to
determine the rain gardens surface area. Use Table 1 if the rain garden is less than 30 feet from the downspout, and use Table 2 if it is more than 30 feet from the downspout.
Table 1 Rain gardens less than 30 feet
Table 2 Rain gardens more than 30 feet
from downspout.
Sandy soil
from downspout.
3-5 in.
deep
6-7 in.
deep
8 in.
deep
0.19
0.15
0.08
Sandy soil
0.03
Size Factor, for all depths
Silty soil
0.34
0.25
0.16
Silty soil
0.06
Clayey soil
0.43
0.32
0.20
Clayey soil
0.10
1. Find the size factor for the soil type and rain garden depth.
2. Multiply the size factor by the drainage area. This number is the recommended rain
garden area.
3. If the recommended rain garden area is much more than 300 square feet, divide it into
smaller rain gardens.
EXAMPLE
Todds rain garden is less than 30 feet from the downspout, and his lawn has a 5% slope, so
he will have a 6-inch deep rain garden. His lawn is silty, so Table 1 recommends a size factor
of 0.25. He multiplies the downspout drainage area, 600 square feet, by 0.25 to nd the
recommended rain garden area, 150 square feet.
600 square ft. by 0.25 = 150 square ft.
113
Choose a size that is best

for your yard
Runoff ows into a new rain garden (shown before plants are fully grown).
How long and how wide should the

rain garden be?
Before building the rain garden, think about how it will catch
water. Runoff will ow out of a downspout and should spread
evenly across the entire length of the rain garden. The rain
garden must be as level as possible so water doesnt pool at
one end and spill over before it has a chance to inltrate.
Remember that these are only

guidelines. The size of the
rain garden also depends on
how much money you want to
spend, how much room you
have in your yard, and how
much runoff you want to control. Again, you can reduce
the size of your rain garden
by as much as 30% and still
control almost 90% of the
runoff. If the sizing table suggests that the rain garden be
200 square feet, but there is
only enough room for a
140-square-foot rain garden,
thats ne. A smaller rain garden will usually work to control most stormwater runoff,
although some bigger storms
might over-top the berm.
The longer side of the rain garden should face upslope; that is, the length of the rain garden should be
perpendicular to the slope and the downspout. This way the garden catches as much water as possible.
However, the rain garden should still be wide enough for the water to spread evenly over the whole bottom
and to provide the space to plant a variety of plants. A good rule of thumb is that the rain garden should be
about twice as long (perpendicular to the slope) as it is wide.
When choosing the width of the garden, think about the slope of the lawn. Wide rain gardens and rain
gardens on steep slopes will need to be dug very deep at one end in order to be level. If the rain garden is
too wide, it may be necessary to bring in additional soil to ll up the downhill half. Experience shows that
making a rain garden about 10 feet wide is a good compromise between the effect of slope and how deep
the rain garden should be. A rain garden should have a maximum width of about 15 feet, especially for
lawns with more than about an 8 percent slope.
To determine the length of the rain garden:
1. Pick the best rain garden width for your lawn and landscaping.
2. Divide the size of your rain garden by the width to nd your rain gardens length.
EXAMPLE
Todd wants a 10-foot wide rain garden, so he divides 150 by 10 to nd the rain garden
length, 15 feet.
rain garden area
width
10
114
= length
150 ft2
= 15 ft
10 ft
Step 2
A note
on tools
Building the Rain Garden
The following
tools will help in
building the rain
garden. Some of
ow that the size and place for the rain garden are set, its
time to get a shovel and start digging. Working alone, it will take
the tools are

optional.
Tape measure
about six hours to dig an average-size rain garden. If friends help it

will go much faster, possibly only an hour or two.
Shovels
Before you start digging, call

Diggers Hotline at 1-800-242-8511.
.If you are building the
rain garden into an
existing lawn, digging
time can be reduced
by killing the grass
rst. A chemical such
as Round-Up can be
used, but a more
environmentally
Rakes
Trowels
Carpenters
level
Wood stakes,
at least 2 ft
long
friendly approach is
to place black plastic
String
over the lawn until

the grass dies. Also,
the best time to build
the rain garden is in
2x4 board, at
least 6 ft long
(optional)
the spring. It will be

easier to dig, and the
plants are more likely
to thrive.
Small backhoe
with caterpillar treads
(optional)
11
115
Leveling
the rain
garden
One way to check
the level of the rain
garden is to just
eyeball it. To do it
more accurately follow these steps:
When the whole
area has been
dug out to about
the right depth,
lay the 2x4 board
in the rain garden
with the carpenters level sitting
on it. Find the
spots that arent
at. Fill in the low
places and dig
out the high
places.
Move the board
to different places
and different
directions, lling
and digging as
necessary to make
the surface level.
When the rain
garden is as level
as you can get it,
rake the soil
smooth.
12
116
The perimeter of a rain garden is dened with string before digging.
Digging the rain garden

While digging the rain garden to the correct depth, heap the soil around the edge
where the berm will be. (The berm is a low wall around three sides of the rain garden
that holds the water in during a storm.) On a steeper lawn the lower part of the rain
garden can be lled in with soil from the uphill half, and extra soil might need to be
brought in for the berm.
Start by laying string around the perimeter of your rain garden. Remember that the
berm will go outside the string. Next, put stakes along the uphill and downhill sides,
lining them up so that each uphill stake has a stake directly downhill. Place one stake
every 5 feet along the length of the rain garden.
Start at one end of the rain garden and tie a string to the uphill stake at ground level.
Tie it to the stake directly downhill so that the string is level. Work in 5-foot-wide sections,
with only one string at a time. Otherwise the strings will become an obstacle.
Start digging at the uphill side of the string. Measure down from the string and dig until
you reach the depth you want the rain garden to be. If the rain garden will be four inches
deep, then dig four inches down from the string. Figure 4 shows how.
If the lawn is almost at, you will be digging at the same depth throughout the rain
garden and using the soil for the berm. If the lawn is steeper, the high end of the rain
garden will need to be dug out noticeably more than the low end, and some of the soil
from the upper end can be used in the lower end to make the rain garden level.
Continue digging and lling one section at a time across the length of your rain garden
until it is as level as possible.
In any garden, compost will help the plants become established and now is the time to
mix in compost if needed. Using a roto-tiller can make mixing much easier, but isnt
necessary. If you do add compost, dig the rain garden a bit deeper. To add two inches
of compost, dig the rain garden one to two inches deeper than planned.
Figure 4 Where to dig and where to put the soil youve dug.
a. Between 3% and 8% slope lawn
downhill
stake
uphill
stake
string
Before
Digging
5% slope
start
digging
here
6"
10'
After
Digging
downhill
stake
uphill
stake
old lawn
surface
string
berm
6"
base of raingarden
10'
uphill
stake
b. Greater than 8% slope lawn
downhill
stake
Before
Digging
string
10% slope
start
digging
here
uphill
stake
After
Digging downhill
stake
8"
old lawn
surface
string
berm
8"
12"
4"
10'
13
117
downspout
uphill
uphill
berm
downhill
Figure 5 The top of the downhill part of the berm

should come up to the same elevation as the entry
to the rain garden at the uphill end.
Making the Berm

Water owing intro the rain garden will naturally try to
On a gentle slope, soil from digging out the garden
can be used to create the berm. This rain garden is
run off the downhill edge. A berm is needed to keep
4 inches deep.
the water in the garden, The berm is a wall across the
bottom and up the sides of the rain garden. The berm will need to be highest at the downhill side. Up the
sides of the rain garden, the berm will become lower and gradually taper off by the time it reaches the top
of the rain garden. Figure 5 shows how the berm should look.
On a at slope there should be plenty of soil from digging out the rain garden to use for a berm. On a
steeper slope, most of the soil from the uphill part of the rain garden was probably used to ll in the downhill half, and soil will have to be brought in from somewhere else. After shaping the berm into a smooth
ridge about a foot across, stomp on it. It is very important to have a well-compacted berm, so stomp hard.
The berm should have very gently sloping sides; this helps smoothly integrate the rain garden with the
surrounding lawn and also makes the berm less susceptible to erosion.
To prevent erosion, cover the berm with mulch or plant grass. Use straw or erosion-control mat to protect
the berm from erosion while the grass is taking root.
If you dont want to plant grass or mulch over the outside of the berm, you can also plant dry-tolerant
prairie species. Some potential berm species are prairie dropseed, little bluestem, prairie smoke, blue-eyed
grass, prairie phlox, and shooting star.
Note: If the downspout is a few feet from the entry to the rain garden, make sure the water runs into the
garden by either digging a shallow grass swale or attaching an extension to the downspout.
14
118
Tips for designing an attractive rain garden

While rain gardens are a highly functional way to help protect water quality, they are also
gardens and should be an attractive part of your yard and neighborhood. Think of the
rain garden in the context of your homes overall landscape design. Here are a few tips:
When choosing native plants for the garden, it is important to consider the height of each
plant, bloom time and color, and its overall texture. Use plants that bloom at different
times to create a long owering season. Mix heights, shapes, and textures to give the
garden depth and dimension. This will keep the rain garden looking interesting even when
few wildowers are in bloom.
When laying plants out, randomly clump individual species in groups of 3 to 7 plants to
provide a bolder statement of color. Make sure to repeat these individual groupings to
create repetition and cohesion in a planting. This will provide a more traditional formal
look to the planting.
Try incorporating a diverse mixture of sedges, rushes, and grasses with your owering
species (forbs). This creates necessary root competition that will allow plants to follow
their normal growth patterns and not outgrow or out-compete other species. In natural
areas, a diversity of plant types not only adds beauty but also create a thick underground
root matrix that keeps the entire plant community in balance. In fact, 80% of the plant
mass in native prairie communities is underground. Once the rain garden has matured and
your sedges, rushes and grasses have established a deep, thick root system, there will be
less change in species location from year to year, and weeds will naturally decline.
Finally, consider enhancing the rain garden by using local or existing stone, ornamental
fences, trails, garden benches, or additional wildower plantings. This will help give the
new garden an intentional and cohesive look and provide a feeling of neatness that the
neighbors will appreciate.
15
119
Step 3
Planting and Maintaining

the Rain Garden
lanting the rain garden is the fun part! A number of planting
designs and lists of suggested plants are included at the end of this
publication. Use these for ideas, but dont be afraid to be creative
theres no single best way to plant a rain garden. Anyone who has
ever done any gardening will have no problem planting a
rain garden, but a few basic reminders are listed below.
Planting the rain garden

Select plants that have a well established root system. Usually one
or two-year-old plants will have root systems that are beginning to
circle or get matted. (Note: use only nursery-propagated plants; do
not collect plants from the wild).
Make sure to have at least a rough plan for which plants will be
planted where. Lay out the plants as planned one foot apart in a grid
pattern, keeping them in containers if possible until they are actually
planted to prevent drying out before they get in the ground.
Dig each hole twice as wide as the plant plug and deep enough
to keep the crown of the young plant level with the existing grade
(just as it was growing in the cell pack or container). Make sure the
crown is level and then ll the hole and rmly tamp around the
roots to avoid air pockets.
Apply double-shredded mulch evenly over the bed approximately two
inches thick, but avoid burying the crowns of the new transplants.
Mulching is usually not necessary after the second growing season
unless the mulched look is desired.
Stick plant labels next to each individual grouping. This will help
identify the young native plants from non-desirable species (weeds)
as you weed the garden.
As a general rule plants need one inch of water per week. Water
immediately after planting and continue to water twice a week
(unless rain does the job) until the plugs are established. You should
not have to water your rain garden once the plants are established.
Plugs can be planted anytime during the growing season as long as
they get adequate water.
16
120
Fire safety
Make sure burning is allowed
in your locale. If so, be sure to
notify the local re department
and obtain a burn permit if
needed. Its also wise not to
mention neighborly to make
sure the neighbors know that
youre burning and that all
safety precautions are being
taken. Basic re precautions
include:
Make sure there is a
re-break (non-burnable area, such as turfgrass) at least 10-feet
wide surrounding the
area to be burned.
Never burn on
windy days.
Never leave an
actively burning re
unattended.
Keep a garden hose
handy in case re strays
where it is not wanted.
Also have a metal leaf
rake in hand to beat
out ames that creep
beyond the burn zone.
What does a rain

garden cost?
The cost of a rain garden will vary
depending on who does the work
and where the plants come from. If
you grow your own plants or borrow plants from neighbors there
can be very little or no cost at all.
If you do all the work but use pur-
Maintaining the rain garden

Weeding will be needed the rst couple of years. Remove by
hand only those plants you are certain are weeds. Try to get out
all the roots of the weedy plants. Weeds may not be a problem in
the second season, depending on the variety and tenacity of
weeds present. In the third year and beyond, the native grasses,
sedges, rushes, and wildowers will begin to mature and will
out-compete the weeds. Weeding isolated patches might still be
needed on occasion.
After each growing season, the stems and seedheads can be left
for winter interest, wildlife cover and bird food. Once spring
arrives and new growth is 4-6-inches tall, cut all tattered plants
back. If the growth is really thick, hand-cut the largest plants and
then use a string trimmer to mow the planting back to a height of
six to eight inches. Dead plant material can also be removed with
a string trimmer or weed whacker (scythe) and composted or disposed of as appropriate.
The best way to knock back weeds and stimulate native plant
growth is to burn off the dead plant material in the rain garden.
However, burning is banned in most municipalities. Another
option is to mow the dead plant material. If the mowing deck of
your lawn mower can be raised to a height of six inches or so, go
ahead and simply mow your rain garden. Then, rake up and
compost or properly dispose of the dead plant material.
chased prairie plants, a rain garden

will cost approximately $3 to $5
per square foot. If a landscaper
does everything, it will cost approximately $10 to $12 per square
foot.
It might seem easiest to sow
native wildower seed over the
garden, but experience shows that
seeding a rain garden has its problems. Protecting the seeds from
wind, ooding, weeds, and garden
pests is very difficult, and the rain
garden will be mostly weeds for
the rst two years. Growing plugs
from seed indoors or dividing a
friends plants is much better. If
you grow plugs, start them about
four months before moving them
to the rain garden. When the roots
have lled the pot and the plants
are healthy, they may be planted in
the rain garden
If the mower deck wont raise that high, use a string trimmer or
weed-eater to cut the stems at a height of 6-8 inches. On thicker
stems, such as cup plant, goldenrods and some asters, a string
trimmer may not be strong enough. For these, use hand clippers
or pruning shears to cut the individual stems.
17
121
Rain Garden Designs and Plant Lists

The following pages contain conceptual planting designs and plant lists for rain gardens
with varying sun and soil conditions. Keep in mind that design possibilities for rain
gardens are almost limitless. Many landscape nurseries, particularly those specializing in
native plants and landscaping, can provide other ideas, designs and suggested plants.
The following eight designs and plant

lists have been provided by Applied
Ecological Services, Inc., Brodhead, WI.
18
122
10 feet
wide;
full to
partial
shade
with clay
soils
20 feet
wide;
full to
partial
shade
with clay
soils
19
123
10 feet
wide;
full to
partial
shade
with silty
& sandy
soils
20 feet
wide;
full to
partial
shade
with silty
& sandy
soils
20
124
10 feet
wide;
full to
partial
sun
with clay
soils
20 feet
wide;
full to
partial
sun
with clay
soils
21
125
10 feet
wide;
full to
partial
sun with
silt and
sandy
soils
20 feet
wide;
full to
partial
sun with
silt and
sandy
soils
22
126
The following three designs and plant

lists have been provided by Prairie
Nursery, Inc., Westeld, WI
23
127
128
RAIN GARDEN FOR CLAY SOILS AND FULL SUN

AREA: 192 Square Feet
Designed to thrive through conditions of periodic water inltrations as well as dry periods
Designed to control 45% of annual runoff from an average sized rooftop (500 to 700 square feet)
Install at least 10 from your foundation, in-line with a down-spout and/or downslope to intercept the rooftop water
Depth of the garden designed to be 3.5 to 4 deep to hold about 200 gallons of water during periods of heavy rainfall
BLOOM
COLOR
HEIGHT
SPACING
early summer
red
3-5
early summer
white
3-5
Blue Flag Iris
early summer
blue
2-3
Penstemon digitalis
Smooth Penstemon
early summer
white
2-3
Liatris pycnostachya
Prairie Blazingstar
summer
pink
3-5
Parthenium integrifolium
Wild Quinine
summer
white
3-5
Ratibida pinnata
Yellow Coneower
summer
yellow
3-6
Boltonia asteroides
False Aster
late summer
white/pink
2-4
Rudbeckia subtomentosa
Sweet Black-Eyed Susan
late summer
yellow
4-6
Vernonia fasciculata
Ironweed
late summer
magenta
4-6
Aster novae-angliae
New England Aster
12
fall
pink/purple
3-6
Solidago rigida
Stiff Goldenrod
12
fall
yellow
3-5
Carex vulpinoidea
Fox Sedge
96
1-3
LATIN NAME
COMMON NAME
AMT
Asclepias incarnata
Red Milkweed
Baptisia lactea
White False Indigo
Iris versicolor
BLOOM
TIME
184 plants
25
129
130
RAIN GARDEN FOR LOAM TO SANDY/LOAM SOILS AND FULL SUN

Install at least 10' from your foundation, in-line with a down-spout and/or downslope to intercept the rooftop water
Depth of the garden designed to be 3.5" to 4" deep to hold about 400 gallons of water during periods of heavy rainfall
BLOOM
COLOR
HEIGHT
SPACING
early summer
red
3'-5'
1'
early summer
white
3'-5'
2'
Blue Flag Iris
early summer
blue
2'-3'
1'
Penstemon digitalis
Smooth Penstemon
early summer
white
2'-3'
1'
Allium cernuum
Nodding Pink Onion
16
summer
pink
1'-2'
6"
Prairie Blazingstar
summer
pink
3'-5'
1'
Wild Quinine
summer
white
3'-5'
1'
Boltonia asteroides
False Aster
late summer
white/pink
2'-4'
1'
late summer
yellow
4'-6'
2'
Ironweed
late summer
magenta
4'-6'
1'
Aster novae-angliae
New England Aster
12
fall
pink/purple
3'-6'
1'
Solidago ohioensis
Ohio Goldenrod
12
fall
yellow
3'-4'
1'
Carex vulpinoidea
Fox Sedge
96
1'-3'
1'
LATIN NAME
COMMON NAME
AMT
Asclepias incarnata
Red Milkweed
Baptisia lactea
White False Indigo
Iris versicolor
BLOOM
TIME
192 plants
27
131
132
RAIN GARDEN FOR SANDY SOILS AND FULL SUN

Install at least 10' from your foundation, in-line with a down-spout and/or downslope to intercept the rooftop water
Depth of the garden designed to be 3.5" to 4" deep to hold about 400 gallons of water during periods of heavy rainfall
BLOOM
COLOR
HEIGHT
SPACING
early summer
red
3'-5'
1'
early summer
white
3'-5'
2'
Blue Flag Iris
early summer
blue
2'-3'
1'
Penstemon digitalis
Smooth Penstemon
early summer
white
2'-3'
1'
Allium cernuum
Nodding Pink Onion
18
summer
pink
1'-2'
6"
Prairie Blazingstar
summer
pink
3'-5'
1'
Wild Quinine
summer
white
3'-5'
1'
Boltonia asteroides
False Aster
late summer
white/pink
2'-4'
1'
late summer
yellow
4'-6'
2'
Ironweed
late summer
magenta
4'-6'
1'
Aster novae-angliae
New England Aster
fall
pink/purple
3'-6'
1'
Solidago ohioensis
Ohio Goldenrod
fall
yellow
3'-4'
1'
Carex vulpinoidea
Fox Sedge (sedge)
64
1'-3'
1'
LATIN NAME
COMMON NAME
AMT
Asclepias incarnata
Red Milkweed
Baptisia lactea
White False Indigo
Iris versicolor
BLOOM
TIME
128 plants
29
133
Special Rain Garden Locations
In addition to conventional lawns, there are other locations where rain gardens can be created. A rectangularshaped rain garden (above) was located in a narrow sideyard between two homes. A new rain garden (below),
now helps control runoff that would ow into a parking lot.
30
134
Rain garden designs and

plant lists provided by John
Gishnock, Applied Ecological
Services, Inc. (pages 19-22)
and Jennifer Baker, Prairie
Nursery Inc. (pages 24-29).
31
135
A how-to manual for homeowners
A frosted rain garden

in autumn.
This publication developed by Roger Bannerman, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

and Ellen Considine, U.S. Geological Survey. Special thanks to John Gishnock, Applied Ecological Services, Inc.,
Jennifer Baker, Prairie Nursery Inc. and Joyce Powers, CRM Ecosystems Inc.
Photos by Roger Bannerman, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
Layout design/production by Jeffrey Strobel, and editorial assistance by Bruce Webendorfer, University of
WisconsinExtension Environmental Resources Center.
This publication is available from county UW-Extension offices, Cooperative Extension Publications, 1-877-947-7827
and from DNR Service Centers.
The publication can also be viewed and printed from pdf format on the web at clean-water.uwex.edu/pubs/raingarden
Copyright 2003 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. University of WisconsinExtension is an EEO/Affirmative Action employer
and provides equal opportunities in employment and programming, including Title IX and ADA requirements.
University of WisconsinExtension
DNR Publication PUB-WT-776 2003
UWEX Publication GWQ037

1-06-03-5M-100-S
136
Appendix D
ROAD/STREAM CROSSING
INSPECTION PROTOCOL DATA SHEET
137
Road/Stream Crossing Inspection Data Sheet

Site ID: ___________
Name of Observer(s)_____________________________
Date_____________
GPS coordinates (lat/long.) _______________________________ OR T/R____________ Sec____ ____

Road Name____________________________ Road Number _________ Structure ID _________
Stream Name__________________________________ Road type
Land Use In Surrounding Area: (circle all that apply)
Forest
Wetland
Open/Field
Pasture
State
County
Cultivated
Town
Private
Urban
Federal Other
Other
Additional comments about location (milepost, etc.):

Road Surface (circle all that apply)
Paved
Erosion of road near crossing?

(if YES, also fill out Section F)
Evidence of crossing blow-out?
Structure Type (circle one)
Culvert
Gravel
Native
Road Width _______ft. with shoulders _______ft.
Is there a trash rack or beaver prevention structure?

Evidence of beaver activity?
Bridge
Ford
No Structure
A. Crossing Characteristics:
Inlet/Upstream
Embankment
or Side Slopes
(not applicable to
Fords)
Channel
Protection
vegetation
other
vegetation
armor
other
Aligned
Pool present
Erosion
Comments/Notes
(if Y, fill out Section F)
Pool scour width

Pool water depth
(max.)
Protection
Ditch
armor
Outlet/Downstream
armor
Present
Protection
vegetation
Connected to stream
Erosion
(if Y, fill out Section F)
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.
other
none
armor
N
armor
other none
Y
other
vegetation
N
armor
other
B. Stream Measurements (See standard procedure in instruction sheet):

Floodplain
A:
Bankfull Width __________feet
B:
Bankfull Depth (left to right facing downstream)

B1:______feet B2:______feet B3:______feet
C:
A
B1
overbank
Fish present?
B3
Water surface
C
Cross-section of stream channel
Water depth _______ feet
Flow conditions:
B2
at bankfull
below bankfull
very low
none
N
page 1
4/2/2007
139
C. Photos: (At a minimum take photos of the structure inlet and outlet and upstream and downstream conditions). Record
photo number and camera number if applicable (example: Photo 6 or Camera 1 Photo 6).
Inlet __________
Upstream __________
Outlet _________
Downstream ________
Additional Photos (as needed to identify issues). Provide location and/or description of issue:
Location ___________________________
Photo Number (and camera number if applicable) ____________
Location ___________________________
Photo Number (and camera number if applicable) ____________
D. Culvert Characteristics (For multiple culverts fill out table below.)

Culvert Shape (circle one)
Round
Culvert Material
Metal
Condition of Structure (check all that apply)

General condition: new
good fair
poor
Square/Rectangle
Concrete
Plugged ____% where?
inlet
outlet
in pipe
Open Bottom Square/Rectangle
Plastic
Crushed ____% where?
inlet
outlet
in pipe
Open Bottom Arch
Wood
Rusted through
Pipe Arch
Condition comments: _____________________________
Ellipse
Road Surface
Culvert Measurements:
A: Culvert Length ________ feet
A
B:
Culvert Height ________ feet
Inlet
Outlet
Culvert Width ________ feet

C:
D:
Water Surface
C
Embankment:
Inlet: D1_____feet D2______feet
Outlet: D1______feet
D2______feet
Culvert Rise (top of culvert to stream bed): Inlet Rise: ____ft
Outlet Rise: ______ft
Inlet/Outlet Characteristics:
Outlet Perch: _____ft
Substrate:
Channel bank
Flow Direction
Depth of water in structure: _______ feet
Inlet Type:
Outlet Type:
D2
Embankment D1
Inlet Drop: ____ft
Projecting
Projecting
Headwall
Headwall
Match Stream? Y
Wingwalls
Wingwalls
Mitered
Mitered
Apron
Apron
Other
Other
Multiple Culverts: NOTE: (number multiple culverts from left to right facing downstream. Fill in sections above for
culvert # 1 and use this table for remaining culverts)

Culvert
#
Shape/
Material
Length
Height
Width
Rise
inlet/outlet
Depth of
water in
structure
Inlet
drop
Outlet
perch
Condition
2
3
4
Page 2 of 4
4/2/2007
140
E. Bridge Characteristics (For multiple cells see below):

Bridge Type (# from diagram) _______
Bridge Surface Material:
Wood
Open decking? Y N
Concrete
Asphalt
Metal
other __________
Bridge Measurements:
A: Span ______feet Width (parallel to stream) ______feet
B:
E1
E2
B1
Bottom of beam to water surface _______feet
B1: Bridge Rise (bottom of beam to stream bed) _______feet

C:
Stream width _______feet
D:
Bottom of beam to top of embankment _______feet
E:
Side Slopes (facing downstream):

Left bank: E1_______feet
E2______feet
Right Bank: E1______feet
Present at inlet (circle all that apply):

Present at outlet (circle all that apply):
Wingwalls
Wingwalls
Apron
Apron
Condition of Structure: Deteriorating

If yes, where (check all that apply)?
Y or N
Abutments
Decking
E2______feet
Other _______________
Other _______________
Wingwalls
Other___________________
Multiple Bridge Cells

NOTE: (number multiple bridge cells (usually separated by abutments) from left to right facing downstream. Fill in sections
above for bridge cell # 1 and use this section for remaining cells)
Bridge Cell #
2
3
4
A (ft.)
B (ft.)
B1 (ft.)
Page 3 of 4
4/2/2007
141
F. Erosion Properties (fill out all that apply, add other locations in blank rows. Other locations to note may
include prominent erosion along stream banks within 50 of crossing.)
Location of Erosion
Erosion Dimensions (feet)

Length
Width
Depth
Material Eroded
(clay, silt, sand, gravel,
loam, sandy loam, OR
gravelly loam)
Erosion
Reaching
Stream?
(Y/N)
Comments
Road approach (left, facing

downstream)
Road approach (right, facing

down stream)
Ditch(s) (upstream side of

road)
Ditch(s) (downstream side of

road)
Road over crossing (or

bridge deck)
Culvert inlet embankment
Culvert outlet embankment
Bridge Side slopes (left,
facing downstream)
Bridge Side slopes (right,

facing down stream)
If erosion occurs on the approaches or in the ditches, is there opportunity (room) to install road drainage measures?
Y
N
G. Site Sketches (Identify road crossing, stream, flow direction, issues, and location and direction of photos):
Comments: (Provide additional information such as invasive plants present, spillways present, etc)
Page 4 of 4
4/2/2007
142
Appendix E
QUALITATIVE FISH HABITAT RATING PROTOCOLS

FOR SMALL AND LARGE WADABLE STREAMS
143
145
146
147
148
Appendix F
PROTOCOLS FOR STUDYING WET WEATHER

IMPACTS AND URBANIZATION PATTERNS
149
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A RY
WATER ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH FOUNDATION
WATERSHEDS AND WATER QUALITY
Protocols for Studying Wet Weather

Impacts and Urbanization Patterns
he research team conducted a pilot study

of eight wa t e rsheds with a gradient of
urban development in the North Carolina
Piedmont and demonstrated that the
hydrologic metric T0.5 responds to changes in
land use and to alternative runoff control
scenarios. (The T0.5is defined as the percent of
time that the flow is greater than the peak
flow of the 0.5-year storm . )
B E N EFITS
Develops a protocol to evaluate the
impacts of land use patterns and
alternative stormwater management
strategies on the biotic integrity of
streams in urbanizing watersheds.
Applies the protocol to urbanization

questions in a pilot study area.
The study also found that the ecological health

of streams in the North Carolina Piedmont, as
measured by macroinv e rtebrate indices, is
This research explored the relationship of
responsive to the T0.5 metric.
urbanization to ecology in the wadeable
RELATED PRODUCTS
streams of developing watersheds.

Furthermore, limited flow monitoring and
macroinvertebrate data can be used in conjunction with hydrologic and hydraulic modeling
to estimate how changes in land use patterns and runoff control scenarios affect the
biotic integrity of streams in a developing watershed.
Performance and Whole Life Costs of BMPs

and SUDS (01CTS21Ta)
The team developed a protocol based on two key findings from the literature rev i ew:
Decentralized Stormwater Controls for

Urban Retrofit and Combined Sewer
Overflow Reduction (03SW3)
The biotic integrity of an urban stream, as measured by the benthic index of biological
integrity (B-IBI), can be related directly to the hydrologic metrics, T0.5 and TQmean, and
these two metrics are in turn related to the intensity of urbanization on a wa t e rshed.
The hydrologic metric T0.5 can be computed using mathematical storm water models,
and T0.5 is sensitive to alternative land use and runoff control scenarios.
This implies that land use planning and runoff control strategies can be related to biotic
integrity in streams.
Overview of the Pro t o c o l

The protocol is illustrated on the next page. The black boxes portray the identification
and collection of necessary biologic data. The white boxes are data analysis activities
comprising hydrologic, geomorphic, and biotic analyses that define the baseline for
s t o rm water management planning. They also form a basis for evaluating the relative
impact of alternative storm water management plans (land use patterns and/or runoff
control strategies) on stream biota for developing wa t e rsheds.
The protocol focuses on the relationship of storm water management practices in
urbanizing wa t e rsheds to biologic health in the receiving streams, as represented by
measures of the fish and aquatic macroinvertebrate communities. Water quality is not
explicitly included in the protocol; howev e r, it is included implicitly because the protocol
requires storm water treatment practices be employed as part of the hydrologic stability
analysis.
Research Recommendations
A carefully conducted experiment should be conducted on an urbanizing wa t e rshed of
13 square miles, using runoff controls and BMPs designed according to the criteria
recommended in this study (see conclusions in report) to relate macroinv e rtebrate health
to T0.5 as the watershed develops. This data needs to be compared to watersheds that are
R e s e a rch Needs: Physical Effects of Wet

Weather Flows on Aquatic Habitats
(00WSM4)
Critical Assessment of Stormwater

Treatment and Control Issues (02SW1)
RELATED ONGOING RESEARCH

Linking BMP Systems Pe r f o rmance to
Receiving Water Protection (SW1R06)
Infiltration vs. Surface-Water Discharge:
Development of Guidelines - Phase II
(04-SW-3)
AVAILABLE FORMAT
Soft cover and online PDF.
TO ORDER
Contact WERF at 703-684-2470 or visit
www.werf.org and click on Publications.
WERF Subscribers :
Your first copy of this report is free.
Additional copies are $10 each or download unlimited free PDFs at www.werf.org.
Non-Subscribers:
Hardcopy: $175 PDF: $50
Refer to: STOCK
NO. 03WSM3
For more information, log on to

www.werf.org.
151
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A RY
Protocols for Studying Wet Weather Impacts and Urbanization Pattern s
in various states of urbanization but that have no significant runoff controls. Care must
be taken in this experiment to control runoff during the construction phase or the
macroinvertebrate indices will reflect the construction impacts rather than the built
environment impacts.
Water quality was not addressed in this work. From the standpoint of protecting the biotic
integrity of receiving streams in urbanizing watersheds, the researchers in this study
believe that the main issues are the runoff controls required to achieve hydrologic and
g e o m o rphic stability. (The controls must include BMPs.) If properly designed, the controls
will remove pollutants from storm water runoff. Nevertheless, the federal Clean Water Act
is based on water quality criteria in receiving streams, and stormwater regulations now
require that TMDL calculations include storm water runoff. Therefore, it is recommended
that future research build on this protocol, by adding water quality sampling of
constituents identified in the water quality criteria applicable to the receiving stream,
adding water quality to storm water models as a runoff parameter, and simulating the
r e m oval of pollutants by runoff control practices.
The researchers believe that implementation of storm water management practices that
reduce the overall volume of runoff through infiltration or evapotranspiration will also aid in
moving towards a more natural hydrologic flow regime that will allow for ecologically
healthy receiving wa t e rs. The impact of such practices depends upon the extent to which
they are implemented. Future research could quantify the biotic impacts of volume
reduction through practices such as low impact dev e l o p m e n t .
The Evaluation Protocol
CONTRACTOR
Larry A. Roesner, Ph.D., P.E.
Colorado State University
Christine A. Pomeroy, Ph.D., P.E.
U n i v e rsity of Utah (formerly with Colorado
State Univers i t y )
Brian P. Bledsoe, Ph.D., P.E.
PROJECT TEAM
James C. Coleman II, Ph.D.
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
Ed Rankin
Midwest Biodiversity Institute
Boris Kondratieff, Ph.D.
Jennifer Davis
John Edgerl y
Ivan Rivas
1. Identify resources for protection/preservation and establish goals.
2. Identify parameters relevant to targeted resources.
PROJECT SUBCOMMITTEE
Peter Ruffier (PSC Chair)
City of Eugene, Oregon
3. Identify development gradient of sites used to generate relationships between

hydrologic and geomorphic metrics and biologic parameters .
Ben Urbonas, P.E. (Co-PSC Chair)

Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
Faith Fitzpatrick, Ph.D.
United States Geological Survey
4a. Obtain biologic data

and compute metrics.
4b. Compute values for hydrologic

and geomorphic metrics.
Nancy White, MLA, Ph.D.

UNC Coastal Studies Institute
Phil Kaufmann, Ph.D.
5. Establish relationships between hydrologic and geomorphic metrics

and biologic data.
6. Evaluate impact of runoff control strategies on

hydrologic and geomorphic metrics.
7. Establish management criteria for stream types of interest.
8. Monitoring on an ongoing basis.
The research on which this report is based

was funded in part by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (U.S. EPS) through
Cooperative Agreement No. CRT-831559-01
with the Water Environment Research
Foundation (WERF). Unless an U.S. EPS logo
appears on the cover, this report is a publication of WERF, not U.S. EPS. Funds awarded
under the agreement cited above were not
used for editorial services, reproduction, printing, or distribution.
10/08
Water Environment Research Foundation
152
635 Slaters Lane, Suite 300 Alexandria
VA 22314-1177
APPENDIX 4B
I ntr oduction
An important component of the 2020 Facility Planning Project and the Regional Water Quality
Management Plan Update (RWQMPU) was the development and application of a suite of
watershed and receiving water models. These models allowed planners to evaluate the potential
water quality benefits of a range of implementation measures, including facility improvements
and urban, suburban, and rural stormwater best management practices. The models are now
being used to support the development of Watershed Restoration Plans for the Kinnickinnic and
Menomonee river watersheds.
A watershed model is essentially a series of algorithms applied to watershed characteristics and
meteorological data to simulate naturally occurring land-based processes over an extended
period of time, including hydrology and pollutant transport. Watershed models were developed
for both the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee rivers by performing the following tasks:
The model structure was established, including the delineation of subwatersheds,

connectivity, and cross sections, etc.
The model data sets were developed using physical measurements, maps, and other
appropriate information
The models were calibrated and validated to observed hydrologic conditions
The models were calibrated and validated to observed water quality conditions
The models were used to perform production runs as required for project planning
The Loading Simulation Program in C++ or LSPC model was used to simulate conditions in the
Kinnickinnic and Menomonee river watersheds and all modeling activities were extensively
reviewed by the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) and the
Modeling Advisory Committee. The final modeling reports are included as appendices to
SEWRPCs Planning Report Number 50.
Calibration refers to the adjustment or fine-tuning of modeling parameters to reproduce
observations. Calibration is based on several years of simulation to allow parameter evaluation
under a variety of climatic conditions. The calibration procedure results in parameter values that
produce the best overall agreement between simulated and observed values throughout the
calibration period. Model validation tests the calibrated model using input from a different time
period, without further parameter adjustment. If the model cannot properly simulate conditions
for the independent data set, the calibration is not acceptable and requires additional work until
validation is achieved.
The calibration time period for the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee LSPC models was January 1,
1995 through December 31, 1998. The validation time period was January 1, 1999 through
December 31, 2002. To support development of the Watershed Restoration Plans, the models
were updated to run through December 31, 2007. The purpose of the update was to account for
known changes in the watersheds and to ensure they still adequately represent baseline
conditions. This appendix summarizes the model update process and results.
2
M odeling Updates
This section describes several updates that were made to the calibrated models.
2.1
Meteorological Data
Hydrologic processes are time varying and depend on changes in environmental conditions
including precipitation, temperature, and wind speed. As a result, meteorological data are a
critical component of LSPC. Appropriate representation of precipitation, wind movement, solar
radiation, potential evapotranspiration, cloud cover, temperature, and dew point are required to
develop a valid model. These data provide necessary input to model algorithms for hydrologic
and water quality representation. This section describes the process that was used to update the
meteorological input data for the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee LSPC models.
2.1.1
Kinnickinnic River
Precipitation for the downstream part of the Kinnickinnic watershed is based on the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) Rain Gage 1203, which is located in the northern
portion of the watershed. Precipitation for the Wilson Park Creek portion of the watershed uses
precipitation from General Mitchell International Airport (GMIA) (National Weather Service
(NWS) 475479), located in the southern part of the watershed. There are some missing data for
gage MMSD1203 and they were patched by the normal ratio method using MMSD gages 1204
and 1216 and GMIA.
Data for the following additional meteorological parameters use observations from GMIA:
Temperature
Cloud cover
Wind speed
Solar radiation
Potential evapotranspiration
Dew point
Precipitation, temperature, cloud cover, wind speed, and dew point are gage monitored, while
potential evapotranspiration (PEVT) and solar radiation were computed. PEVT for the
Kinnickinnic model was estimated using the Penman method, which calculates PEVT by first
estimating evaporation from a Class A pan and then converts it to a PEVT estimate by
application of a monthly coefficient.
2.1.2
Menomonee
Precipitation data for the Menomonee River watershed are from five MMSD weather gages
(1204, 1207, 1209, 1216, and 1218). Missing precipitation data from these stations were patched
by the normal ratio using available data from index stations as shown in Table 1. Index stations
were determined based on the proximity to the patch stations.
T able 1.
The matrix of patch stations and index stations

st
Patch Station
MMSD1204
MMSD1207
MMSD1209
MMSD1216
MMSD1218
1 Priority Index
Station
MMSD1203
MMSD1209
MMSD1207
MMSD1203
MMSD1207
nd
2 Priority Index
Station
MMSD1216
MMSD1218
MMSD1218
MMSD1204
MMSD1209
rd
3 Priority Index
Station
GMIA
GMIA
GMIA
GMIA
GMIA
Air temperature data for the upper portion of the watershed is from the National Weather Service
Hartford cooperating observer station 473453, while temperatures for the remainder of the
watershed and other climatologic series are from GMIA. Data for cloud cover, wind speed,
potential evapotranspiration, dew point, and solar radiation are based on GMIA for the entire
watershed.
To ensure consistency with the previous modeling, a combined PEVT series was created using
Penman PEVT estimates for the April to June period and Jensen-Haise estimates for the
remainder of the year. The combined PEVT series is used for the upper parts of the Menomonee
River watershed that are 35 percent or more rural and the Penman series are used for the areas of
the watershed that are more than 65 percent urban.
2.2
Simulation of Point Sources
Discharges of combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) were
input to the Kinnickinnic and Menomonee models during the original calibration and validation
effort based on detailed output from MOUSE modeling. Resources were not available to obtain
comparable data for the model update. Instead, the time series of discharges from the previous
effort were shifted forward. This approach allows for the long-term impacts of the CSOs and
SSOs to be included in the modeling and was considered acceptable for evaluating whether the
models still adequately represent baseline conditions.
Industrial point sources discharges were also shifted forward; as these facilities were previously
represented as constant time series inputs, this approach is consistent with the original calibration
and validation effort.
2.3
Miller Park Update
In 2007 sanitary sewers at Miller Park were found to be misconnected to a storm sewer, allowing
untreated human waste to flow directly into the Menomonee River. The problem has since been
corrected and therefore the Menomonee River LSPC model was updated by returning the fecal
coliform loading rates in that modeling subbasin to their original estimates. (During calibration
of the LSPC model loads of fecal coliform were increased from original estimates to match
observed instream conditions. The increases were attributed to unknown sources of fecal
coliform, including illicit sanitary sewer connections such as those found at Miller Park. To
account for the elimination of the Miller Park connection the loading rates in that modeling
subbasin were returned to their original values.)
3
K innickinnic R iver R esults
The results of running the calibrated model for the time period January 1, 2003 through
December 31, 2007 are presented in this section both graphically and statistically. Graphical
comparisons are extremely useful for judging the results of model calibration because time3
variable plots of observed versus modeled flow provide insight into the models representation of
storm hydrographs, baseflow recession, time distributions, and other pertinent factors often
overlooked by statistical comparisons. Graphical comparisons consist of time series plots of
observed and simulated values for flows, observed versus simulated scatter plots with a 45
degree linear regression line displayed, and cumulative frequency distributions (flow duration
curves). Statistical comparisons focus on the relative error method. A small relative error
indicates a better goodness of fit for calibration.
A map of the Kinnickinnic River and the location of the USGS flow gages and MMSD water
quality monitoring stations is shown in Figure 1. Hydrologic results for modeling reach 807,
located at USGS gage 04087159, are presented in Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4, and Table 1.
Hydrologic results for modeling reach 818, located at USGS gage 040871488 on Wilson Park
Creek, are presented in Figure 5, Figure 6, Figure 7, and Table 2. Water quality results for
monitoring stations RI-12 and RI-13 on the Kinnickinnic River are presented in Figure 10 to
Figure 19.
The hydrologic results are consistent with the original calibration and validation results and
indicate an acceptable match to the observed values. The Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient of model fit
improved from 0.71 at both gages for the 1995 to 2002 time period to 0.78 at gage 04087159 and
0.84 at gage 040871488 for the 2003 to 2007 time period. Water quality results also appear to
indicate an acceptable match to the observed data.
Figure 1.
Location of MMSD sampling stations and USGS flow gages on the Kinnickinnic River.
Avg Flow (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)

Line of Equal Value
Best-Fit Line
Avg Monthly Rainfall (in)

Avg Observed Flow (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)
Avg Modeled Flow (Same Period)
40
0
F
0.5
y = 0.9005x - 0.5418
2
R = 0.8655
30
30
20
10
1.5
2
20
2.5
3
10
3.5
4
0
0
10
20
30
4.5
40
9 10 11 12
Month
Average Observed Flow (cfs)

Average Monthly Rainfall (in)
Median Observed Flow (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)
Observed (25th, 75th)

Modeled (Median, 25th, 75th)
0
30
1
1
25
20
15
3
3
10
4
5
Monthly Rainfall (in
35
Flow (cfs)
Flow (cfs)
Average Modeled Flow (cfs)
40
5
1
10
11
12
Month
Figure 2.
Composite (average monthly) hydrologic calibration results for the Kinnickinnic River at USGS gage
04087159 (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).
800
700
Flow (cfs)
600
500
400
300
10
200
Daily Rainfall (in)

Avg Observed Flow (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007 )
12
100
14
0
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
Jan-06
Jan-07
Date
Figure 3.
Time series hydrologic calibration results (daily mean) for the Kinnickinnic River at USGS gage 04087159
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).
Observed Flow Duration (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007 )

Modeled Flow Duration (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007 )
Daily Average Flow (cfs)
1000
100
10
1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Percent of Time that Flow is Equaled or Exceeded
Figure 4.
Flow duration curve hydrologic calibration results for the Kinnickinnic River at USGS gage 04087159
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).
Table 1.
Comparison of simulated versus observed flows for the Kinnickinnic River at USGS gage 04087159
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)
LSPC Simulated Flow
Observed Flow Gage
Total Simulated In-stream Flow:
87.40
Total Observed In-stream Flow:
100.00
Total of simulated highest 10% flows:

Total of Simulated lowest 50% flows:
46.31
12.02
Total of Observed highest 10% flows:

Total of Observed Lowest 50% flows:
59.89
11.94
Simulated Summer Flow Volume (months 7-9):

Simulated Fall Flow Volume (months 10-12):
Simulated Winter Flow Volume (months 1-3):
Simulated Spring Flow Volume (months 4-6):
19.38
15.54
20.33
32.15
Observed Summer Flow Volume (7-9):

Observed Fall Flow Volume (10-12):
Observed Winter Flow Volume (1-3):
Observed Spring Flow Volume (4-6):
25.53
18.91
22.72
32.85
Total Simulated Storm Volume:

Simulated Summer Storm Volume (7-9):
36.05
9.60
Total Observed Storm Volume:

Observed Summer Storm Volume (7-9):
48.51
14.22
Errors (Simulated-Observed)
Error in total volume:
Error in 50% lowest flows:
Error in 10% highest flows:
Seasonal volume error - Summer:
Seasonal volume error - Fall:
Seasonal volume error - Winter:
Seasonal volume error - Spring:
Error in storm volumes:
Error in summer storm volumes:
Nash-Sutcliffe Coefficient of Efficiency, E:
Error Statistics
-12.60
0.72
-22.67
-24.07
-17.81
-10.52
-2.13
-25.67
-32.50
0.783

Avg Flow (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)

Line of Equal Value
Best-Fit Line
30
0
J
R = 0.9135
20
20
10
1.5
2
2.5
3
10
3.5
4
4.5
0
0
10
20
30
9 10 11 12
Month


0
18
16
1
1
14
12
10
6
4
20
Flow (cfs)
0.5
y = 0.981x - 0.0915
Flow (cfs)
30
5
1
10
11
12
Month
Figure 5.
Composite (average monthly) hydrologic calibration results for Wilson Park Creek at USGS gage
040871488 (1/1/2003 to 12/31//2007).
300
250
2
4
200
150
100
10
50
Daily Rainfall (in)
Flow (cfs)

12
14
0
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
Jan-06
Jan-07
Date
Figure 6.
Time series hydrologic calibration results (daily mean) for Wilson Park Creek at USGS gage 040871488
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).

1000
100
10
0.1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Figure 7.
Flow duration curve hydrologic calibration results for Wilson Park Creek at USGS gage 040871488
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).
Table 2.
Comparison of simulated versus observed flows for Wilson Park Creek at USGS gage 040871488 (1/1/2003
to 12/31/2007)
LSPC Simulated Flow
Observed Flow Gage
97.18
100.00

49.56
14.27

57.89
11.59

20.41
18.21
23.67
34.89

23.11
19.89
23.96
33.05

38.07
9.74

45.69
11.97
Error Statistics
-2.82
23.15
-14.38
-11.67
-8.44
-1.20
5.57
-16.69
-18.58
0.844
10
200
Daily Modeled at RI-12
Daily Observed at RI-12
Total Suspended Solids (mg/L)
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2003
Figure 8.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total suspended solids time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-12.
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2003
Figure 9.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total suspended solids time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-13.
11
1.4
Daily modeled at RI-12
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
1.2
Daily observed at RI-12
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
2003
Figure 10.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total phosphorus time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-12.
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
2003
Figure 11.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total phosphorus time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-13.
12
7.0
Total Nitrogen (mg/L)
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
2003
Figure 12.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total nitrogen time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-12.
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
2003
Figure 13.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total nitrogen time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-13.
13
1,000,000
Fecal Coliform (#/100mL)
100,000
10,000
1,000
100
10
1
2003
Figure 14.

2004
2005
2006
2007
Fecal coliform time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-12.
1,000,000
Fecal Coliform (#/100mL)
100,000
10,000
1,000
100
10
1
2003
Figure 15.

2004
2005
2006
2007
Fecal coliform time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-13.
14
60
Copper (ug/L)
50
40
30
20
10
0
2003
Figure 16.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total copper time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-12.
60
Copper (ug/L)
50
40
30
20
10
0
2003
Figure 17.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total copper time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-13.
15
500
450
400
Zinc (ug/L)
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2003
Figure 18.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total zinc time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-12.
500
450
400
Zinc (ug/L)
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2003
Figure 19.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total zinc time series validation at Kinnickinnic River RI-13.
16
M enomonee R iver R esults
A map of the Menomonee River and the location of the USGS flow gages and MMSD water
quality monitoring stations is shown in Figure 20. Hydrologic results for USGS gage 04087120
are presented in Figure 20 to Figure 23 and Table 3. Hydrologic results for USGS gage
04087088 on Underwood Creek are presented in Figure 24 to Figure 26 and Table 4. Water
quality results for monitoring stations RI-16, RI-21, and RI-22 are presented in Figure 31 to
Figure 50.
The updated hydrologic results for the Menomonee River model are consistent with the previous
calibration and validation effort and still adequately simulate conditions observed over the period
2003 to 2007. The Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient of model fit at gage 04087120 changed from 0.89
for the period 1995 to 2002 to 0.85 for the period 2003 to 2007. The Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient of
model fit at gage 04087088 changed from 0.88 for the period 1995 to 2002 to 0.79 for the period
2003 to 2007. Water quality results also appear to indicate an acceptable match to the observed
data.
17
Figure 20.
Location of MMSD sampling stations and USGS flow gages on the Menomonee River.
18
Avg Flow (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)

Line of Equal Value
Best-Fit Line

F
0.5
R2 = 0.9454
200
100
1.5
200
2
2.5
3
100
3.5
4
4.5
100
200
300
9 10 11 12
Month


300
0
F
250
1
1
200
2
2
150
100
3
4
50
Flow (cfs)
y = 0.858x + 8.4475
Flow (cfs)
300
300
5
1
10
11
12
Month
Figure 21.
Composite (average monthly) hydrologic calibration results for the Menomonee River at USGS gage
04087120 (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).
19
3000
2500
2
4
2000
1500
1000
10
500
Daily Rainfall (in)
Flow (cfs)

12
14
0
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
Jan-06
Jan-07
Date
Figure 22.
Time series hydrologic calibration results (daily mean) for the Menomonee River at USGS gage 04087120
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).

10000
1000
100
10
1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Figure 23.
Flow duration curve hydrologic calibration results for the Menomonee River at USGS gage 04087120
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).
20
Table 3.
Comparison of simulated versus observed flows for the Menomonee River at USGS gage 04087120
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)
LSPC Simulated Flow
Observed Flow Gage
93.51
100.00

45.26
9.95

53.52
9.94

14.05
15.59
22.73
41.14

17.19
15.35
25.33
42.13

22.50
4.38

24.75
5.33
Error Statistics
-6.49
0.04
-15.44
-18.26
1.60
-10.26
-2.37
-9.11
-17.87
0.848
21
Avg Flow (1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007)

Line of Equal Value
Best-Fit Line

F
0.5
R2 = 0.9489
20
10
1.5
20
2
2.5
3
10
3.5
4
4.5
10
20
30
9 10 11 12
Month


30
0
F
25
1
1
20
2
2
15
10
3
4
Flow (cfs)
y = 0.9223x + 0.2904
Flow (cfs)
30
30
5
1
10
11
12
Month
Figure 24.
Composite (average monthly) hydrologic calibration results for Underwood Creek at USGS gage 04087088
(1/1/2003 to 112/31/2007).
22
600
500
2
4
400
300
200
10
100
Daily Rainfall (in)
Flow (cfs)

12
14
0
Jan-03
Jan-04
Jan-05
Jan-06
Jan-07
Date
Figure 25.
Time series hydrologic calibration results (daily mean) for Underwood Creek at USGS gage 04087088
(1/1/2003 to 12/31/2007).

1000
100
10
0.1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Figure 26.
Flow duration curve hydrologic calibration results for Underwood Creek at USGS gage0 4087088 (1/1/2003
to 12/31/2007).
23
Table 4.
Comparison of simulated versus observed flows for Underwood Creek at USGS gage 04087088 (1/1/2003
to 12/31/2007)
LSPC Simulated Flow
Observed Flow Gage
94.40
100.00

51.66
10.20

51.79
12.95

17.92
14.30
23.30
38.88

19.55
17.04
22.87
40.55

33.43
7.38

33.26
8.05
Error Statistics
-5.60
-21.20
-0.26
-8.33
-16.07
1.88
-4.11
0.49
-8.27
0.787
24
700

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2003
Figure 27.
2004
2005
2006
Total suspended solids time series validation at Menomonee River RI-16.
700

600
2007
500
400
300
200
100
0
2003
Figure 28.
2004
2005
2006
2007
25
700

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2003
Figure 29.
2004
2005
2006
700

600
2007
500
400
300
200
100
0
2003
Figure 30.
2004
2005
2006
2007
26
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2003
Figure 31.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total phosphorus time series validation at Menomonee River RI-16.
Daily modeled at RI-21 (mg/L)
0.6
(mg/L)
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2003
Figure 32.
2004
2005
2006
2007
27
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2003
Figure 33.
2004
2005
2006
2007
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2003
Figure 34.
2004
2005
2006
2007
28
10
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2003
Figure 35.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total nitrogen time series validation at Menomonee River RI-16.
10
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2003
Figure 36.
2004
2005
2006
2007
29
10
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2003
Figure 37.
2004
2005
2006
2007
10
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2003
Figure 38.
2004
2005
2006
2007
30
1,000,000
Fecal coliform (#/100mL)
100,000
10,000
1,000
100
10
1
2003
Figure 39.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Fecal coliform time series validation at Menomonee River RI-16.
1,000,000
100,000
10,000
1,000
100
10

1
2003
Figure 40.
2004
2005
2006
2007
31
1,000,000
100,000
10,000
1,000
100
10

1
2003
Figure 41.
2004
2005
2006
2007
1,000,000
100,000
10,000
1,000
100
10

1
2003
Figure 42.
2004
2005
2006
2007
32
60
50
Copper (ug/L)
40
30
20
10
0
2003
Figure 43.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total copper time series validation at Menomonee River RI-16.
60
50
Copper (ug/L)
40
30
20
10
0
2003
Figure 44.
2004
2005
2006
2007
33
60
50
Copper (ug/L)
40
30
20
10
0
2003
Figure 45.
2004
2005
2006
2007
60
50
Copper (ug/L)
40
30
20
10
0
2003
Figure 46.
2004
2005
2006
2007
34
400
350
Zinc (ug/L)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2003
Figure 47.
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total zinc time series validation at Menomonee River RI-16.
400
350
Zinc (ug/L)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2003
Figure 48.
2004
2005
2006
2007
35
400
350
Zinc (ug/L)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2003
Figure 49.
2004
2005
2006
2007
400
350
Zinc (ug/L)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2003
Figure 50.
2004
2005
2006
2007
36
APPENDIX 4C
Fact Sheet for Assessment Point KK-1
Assessment Point: KK-1

The following data are excerpts from multiple reports. While the same location in the
Kinnickinnic watershed is represented, the assessment point IDs differ. Throughout the
following data, Assessment Point KK-1 is also represented by:
o Reach 831
o RI-831
o Lyons Park Creek
94
59
894
io n
Villa ge of
WEST MILW AUKE E
ve
al A
SOUTH 43RD ST REET DIT CH
re
st
om
ve
38
20 t h St
27 t h St
35 t h St
o
el
43 r d S t
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
W
WE
ES
S TT A
A LL LL II S
S
ve
tA
Fo
60 t h St
45
794
B ur nha m S t
B ur nha m S t
Linc oln A v e
Linc oln A v e
COMBINED SEWER AREA
24
KINNICKINNIC RIVER
C le v e la nd A v e
T
Ok la hom a A v e
Fo
t
es
om
C le v e la nd A v e
ve
Ok la hom a A v e
C ha s e A v e
6t h S t
13 t h St
20 t h St
35 t h St
43 r d S t
60 t h St
27 t h St
LYONS PARK CREEK
62
C le m en t Av e
N at
13 t h St
100
59
181
59
32
Mo rg an A v e
Mo rg an A v e
241
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
S
S TT .. FF R
RA
AN
NC
C II S
S
WILSON PARK CREEK

H owa r d A ve
CHEROKEE PARK CREEK
894
36
45
43
B oliv ar A ve
94
38
La y ton A v e
62
Pe nn sy lv a nn ia A v e
H owe ll Av e
6t h S t
La y ton A v e
13 t h St
24
894
35 t h St
43
20 t h St
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
D
E LL D
G
N FF II E
EN
EE
RE
GR
27 t h St
100
VIL LA MANN CREEK
Edg e rt on A ve
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
C
CU
UD
DA
AH
HY
Y
WILSON PARK CREEK
HOLMES AVENUE CREEK
32
Gr a nge Av e
Gr a nge Av e
119
Village of
HALES CORNERS
Village of
GREENDALE
62
LEGEND
Water
KK WATERSHED
Waterbodies
Watersheds
Subwatersheds
Civil Divisions
1,150 2,300
Feet
4,600

September 24, 2008
ve
Burnham St
Burnham St
H
st
re
Fo
Linc oln Ave
Linc oln Ave
COMBINED SEWER AREA
KINNICKINNIC RIVER
Cleveland Ave
Okla homa Ave
e
Av
20th St
27th St
e
Av
35th St
o it
43rd St
l
Be
60th St
SOUTH 43RD STREET DITCH
om
H
st
re
Fo
om
Cleveland Ave
e
Av
Okla homa Ave
Chase Ave
6th St
13th St
20th St
27th St
35th St
43rd St
60th St
LYONS PARK CREEK
Clement Ave
A
na l
13th St
o
Nati
Morgan Ave
Morgan Ave
WILSON PARK CREEK

Howard Ave
CHEROKEE PARK CREEK
Bolivar Ave
VILLA MANN CREEK

Lay ton Ave
Pennsy lvannia Ave
Howell Ave
6th St
13th St
20th St
27th St
35th St
Lay ton Ave
Edgerton Ave
WILSON PARK CREEK
HOLMES AVENUE CREEK
Gra nge Ave
Gra nge Ave
LEGEND
Water
Waterbodies
Watersheds
Aerial Map
Subwatersheds
Civil Divisions
1,100 2,200
Feet
4,400

September 24, 2008
94
59
ve
38
13th St
20th St
Lincoln Ave
Lincoln Ave
43rd St
24
Cleveland Ave
Cleveland Ave
60th St
KK-9
KK-3
KK-10
Oklahoma Ave
20th St
ve
43rd St
eA
27th St
s
re
Fo
Oklahoma Ave
om
tH
35th St
32
Morgan Ave
KINNICKINNIC RIVER
Morgan Ave
62
Clement Ave
it
m
Ho
st
re
eA
13th St
lo
Be
27th St
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
W
WE
ES
S TT A
A LL LL II S
S
Fo
KK-2
e
Av
794
Burnham St
Burnham St
60th St
45
Villa ge of
WEST MILWAUKEE
Av e
Chase Ave
894
nal
6th St
o
Na ti
35th St
100
59
181
59
KK-1
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
S
S TT .. FF R
RA
AN
NC
C II S
S
241
Howard Ave
894
KK-8
KK-7
36
45
43
Bolivar Ave
94
38
Layton Ave
62
Pennsylvannia Ave
Howell Ave
Layton Ave
6th St
24
KK-6
Y
35th St
894
13th St
Y
43
43
20th St
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
D
E LL D
G
N FF II E
EN
EE
RE
GR
27th St
100
Edger ton Ave
C
C ii tt yy oo ff
C
CU
UD
DA
AH
HY
Y
KK-4
KK-5
32
Grange Ave
Grange Ave
119
Village of
HALES CORNERS
Village of
GREENDALE
62
ZZ
ZZ
LEGEND
Assessment Points
32
KK Watershed
Model Reach Tributary Area
Water
Watershed
Waterbodies
Civil Division
1,200 2,400
Feet
4,800

September 24, 2008
Clevelan d Ave
KK-1
r
Fo
om
e
Av
60th St
43rd St
Okla hom a Ave
tH
es
Morgan Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
CSO
Water
Assessment Point Map : KK-1

Watershed
SSO
Waterbodies
NonContact Cooling Water
Civil Division
350
700
Feet
1,400

September 24, 2008
Clevelan d Ave
KK-1
r
Fo
om
e
Av
60th St
43rd St
Okla hom a Ave
tH
es
Morgan Ave
LEGEND
Assessment Points
Water
Waterbodies
Watersheds
Land Use
Agriculture
Civil Divisions
Commercial
Surface Water
Land Use Map : KK-1

0
350
700
Feet
1,400

September 24, 2008
Menomonee River - Variance Standards/Targets

Constituent
Measure
Standard/Target
1
Variance Standard - Geometric mean not to exceed

Fecal Coliform
1,000 counts/100 ml
1
Variance Standard - Less than 10% of all samples/month

1
2,000 counts/100 ml
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
Variance Standard - Minimum Concentration
2 mg/l
USGS Median TSS Reference Concentration (estimated

background concentration)
17.2 mg/l
Total Phosphorus (TP)
Flashiness
1
Planning Guideline
Richards Baker Flashiness Index (quantifies the frequency
and rapidity of short-term changes in stream flow; the index
ranges from 0 - 2, with 0 being constant flow)
Variance standards are from Chapter NR 104 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code apply.
0.1 mg/l
indicator only
Kinnickinnic River Watershed Restoration Plan Fact Sheet

KK-1, Reach 831, Lyons Park Creek
Data resulting from model runs:
Figure
Flashiness index
Overall Project
Analysis
Team Assessment
The Flashiness Index quantifies the frequency and rapidity of short-term changes in stream flow. The index ranges from 0
Moderate
Dissolved oxygen
v. days per year
Moderate to Poor
Fecal coliform v.
days per year
Variable (some
good, some bad)
Phosphorus v.
days per year
Suspended solids
v. days per year
Good
Monthly
dissolved oxygen
Moderate
Monthly fecal
coliform
Moderate
Monthly
phosphorus
Good
Monthly
suspended solids
Very Good
Very Good
to 2, with 0 being constant flow. The flashiness is slightly high at this location.
Typically, aquatic communities need 5 mg/l or more of dissolved oxygen to survive. Concentrations at this site fall below
this level approximately 30% of the time, but do not go below 3 mg/l. However, the variance standard of 2 mg/l is met at
all times.
For recreational uses, lower fecal coliform counts (a measure of bacteria) are better (preferably under 400 counts / 100ml).
The counts on majority of the days are either below 400 or above 5,000. A goal in this case may be to determine the
conditions that create the above 5,000 days and discourage recreational use on days that meet these conditions. As there
is a variance that allows the fecal coliform counts to reach 2,000, another goal could be to find ways to decrease coliform
loading in order to increase the number of days that have fewer than 2,000 counts.
Phosphorus is a nutrient that can lead to increased growth of algae. The concentrations on most of the days are at or
below the 0.1 mg/l planning guideline. Phosphorus concentrations do not exceed 0.4 mg/l on any day.
Suspended solids cause water to become cloudy and aesthetically unpleasant. They can clog the gills of fish and
invertebrates, make feeding difficult, and lead to sediment deposition (poor habitat). The concentrations on most of the
days are less than 25 mg/l and the concentration does not exceed 100 mg/l on any day.
Dissolved oxygen concentrations are highly variable in the spring. This variability suggests that there is either excessive
algal growth or organic enrichment and biochemical oxygen demand within the ecosystem. The decline in oxygen
concentrations in the summer is typical due to the decreased solubility of oxygen in warmer water. While oxygen
concentrations decline below 5 mg/l, the variance (which allows levels as low as 2 mg/l) is met.
While the ranges of values are fairly consistent throughout the year, notice that the 75th percentile values decline during
the summer swimming season. This may be related to the die-off of bacteria due to solar radiation. Conditions are
particularly poor in March and are likely related to snow melt.
In the early spring, the low ends of the ranges of phosphorus concentrations increase, possibly related to fertilizer
application. Phosphorus concentrations then decrease through the late spring, summer, and early fall. This may be related
to uptake by plants during the growing season.
Suspended solids concentrations fall below the reference concentration most of the time. The majority of the higher
concentrations are likely related to larger rain or snow melt events that disturb bare soil. As this is a concrete-lined
channel, there is little sediment to re-suspend from the stream bed.

KK - WRP Part 1

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

KK - WRP Part 1

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Watershed Restoration Plan

Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1

Watershed Restoration Plan Development and Findings................................................. 1-5

Baseline Year 2000 Conditions ......................................................................... 1-6

Management Strategies to Achieve Goals ......................................................... 1-7

Expected Benefits .............................................................................................. 1-7

Prioritization of Actions .................................................................................... 1-8

Other Pollutants ............................................................................................... 1-13

Implementation and Monitoring ...................................................................... 1-13

Policy Issues .................................................................................................... 1-13

Public Health Targets and Foundation Actions ............................................................... 1-9

Habitat and Aesthetics Targets and Foundation Actions ............................................... 1-11

Nutrients Targets and Foundation Actions .................................................................... 1-12

Watershed Restoration Plan

CHAPTER 2: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 2-1

Purpose of the Watershed Restoration Plan ..................................................................... 2-1

Pathway to the Watershed Restoration Plan .................................................................... 2-1

Forging a New Path ........................................................................................... 2-2

Plan Implementation Considerations ............................................................................... 2-3

Consideration of Total Maximum Daily Load Analyses .................................. 2-3

Third Party Total Maximum Daily Loads and NR 151..................................... 2-4

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Nonpoint Pollution Program Wis.

Pathway Decision............................................................................................................. 2-6

Development of the Watershed Restoration Plan .......................................................... 2-10

Overview ......................................................................................................... 2-10

Detailed Tasks ................................................................................................. 2-12

Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2-13

Annual Bacteria Load Percentages by Source Category to the Kinnickinnic River

What Pathways Exist for Progress? ................................................................................. 2-3

Integrated Watershed Implementation Planning Meeting Agenda

Watershed Restoration Plan

CHAPTER 3: BUILD PARTNERSHIPS ................................................................................ 3-1

Stakeholders for the Watershed Restoration Plan ............................................................ 3-1

Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. .............................................................. 3-2

Executive Steering Council ............................................................................... 3-3

Science Committee, Modeling, and Habitat Subcommittees ............................ 3-4

Watershed Action Teams .................................................................................. 3-6

Policy Committee .............................................................................................. 3-6

Watershed Action Team Visioning Session .................................................... 3-10

Watershed Restoration Plan Focus Areas ....................................................... 3-12

Habitat Considerations .................................................................................... 3-13

Education and Outreach ................................................................................................. 3-13

Watershed Booklets ......................................................................................... 3-14

Annual Conference .......................................................................................... 3-14

Other Southeastern Wisconsin Watersheds Trust, Inc. Education and Outreach

Invited Participants - KK Watershed Action Team

Participants - KK Watershed Action Team

Watershed Restoration Plan

CHAPTER 4: CHARACTERIZE THE WATERSHED ....................................................... 4-1

Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4-1

Habitat Assessment within the Kinnickinnic River Watershed ....................................... 4-8

Assessment Point Areas (Subwatersheds) ..................................................................... 4-25

Lyons Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-1) .................................................. 4-25

South 43rd Street Ditch (Assessment Point KK-2) .......................................... 4-41

Kinnickinnic River Mainstem (Assessment Point KK-3) ............................... 4-56

Wilson Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-4) ................................................ 4-73

Holmes Avenue Creek (Assessment Point KK-5) .......................................... 4-88

Villa Mann Creek (Assessment Point KK-6) ................................................ 4-103

Cherokee Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-7) ........................................... 4-118

Wilson Park Creek (Assessment Point KK-8) .............................................. 4-133

Approximate Percentage of Connected Impervious Surfaces Created by Urban

Physical and Biological Conditions ............................................................................... 4-11

Aggregated Bioassessment Results................................................................................ 4-17