town pepin comprehensive plan379104f9-0de8-498c-8406... · fights were common among indian groups...

Town of PepinPepin County

Wisconsin

Comprehensive Plan

Public Hearing: September 15, 2009

Plan Committee Members:Andrea Myklebust

Jim SterryGary SamuelsonRobert Bjerstedt

Alice AuthCarol Inderion

Rob MeyerLou Seyffer

Jim ReeserBruce PetersonMark Johnson

Betty BergmarkDennis Wolfe

August 27, 2009 Town of Pepin Comprehensive Plan Page 1 of 73

Table of Contents

General Characteristics

History of Town of Pepin Page 3

General Planning Goals Page 6

Elements Section

Issues and Opportunities Page 7

Transportation Page 13

Housing Page 17

Utilities and Community Facilities Page 22

Agricultural, Natural, Cultural Resources

Agricultural Page 26

Natural Page 30

Cultural Page 34

Intergovernmental Cooperation Page 36

Economic Development Page 39

Land Use Page 45

Implementation Page 52

Appendix

Appendix I Survey letter and form Page 59

Appendix II Maps Page 63

1. Bluffland & Slope Areas2. Floodplain3. Surface Waters/Wetlands4. Groundwater Flow and Nitrates5. Land Use

Appendix III Cultural/Historic Sites Page 68


General Characteristics

The Town of Pepin is located in Pepin County in West Central Wisconsin. Lake Pepin, a wide part ofthe Mississippi River, forms a southern border. The Chippewa River borders the eastern boundary. Tothe north Frankfort Township of Pepin County and Maiden Rock Township of Pierce County are foundon the map. Stockholm Township forms a western border. Pierce and Dunn County are located to thewest and north and Buffalo County is located across the Chippewa River as our eastern neighbor.The land survey system designates the Town of Pepin at Townships 23 and 24 North, Ranges 14 and15 West of the 4th Prime Meridian. There are more than 50 numbered sections in whole or in partwithin the township. According to U.S. Census data, the town has a total area of 52.6 square miles(136.1 km sq.), of which, 45.4 square miles (117.7 km²) of it is land and 7.1 square miles (18.4 km²) ofit (13.55%) is water.

Land assessment categories for Pepin Township based on County property records as of November 6,2008 contains records for a total of 21,712 acres. The land totals for each category are as follows:Residential: 621 acres, Commercial: 68 acres, Manufacturing: 32 acres, Agriculture: 12,688 acres,Undeveloped: 1413 acres, Managed Forest: 3,067 acres, Forest: 3,602 acres, Other: 221 acres.

From the south, river floodplain gradually increases in elevation to reach peaks of bluff lands abovethe greater Mississippi and Chippewa River valleys. Numerous creeks are located in the Town ofPepin and many are fed by springs. The bluffs north of the Mississippi are set back nearly 2 mileswhere two elevations of first sandy prairie and then richer soils are found. The bluffs consist oflimestone deposits overlaid with loam and numerous clay deposits. The terrain can be described withtwo terms: rolling hills and floodplain. The steep slopes are filled with deep ditches which fill brieflyduring the thawing of winter snow and heavy rains. Forests are filled with many maple trees birch, oakand low brush.

As settlers cleared the forests on rolling hills, agriculture became the primary enterprise. Small dairyfarms dotted the land and were surrounded by corn, soybean, alfalfa and other grain crops. Cropproduction has been maintained at the higher elevations of the township and some crops are producedin sandy soils below the bluffs. Areas where vegetables, flowers and decorative plants are grown canalso be found in the township. The dairies have been reduced in number, but have grown in herd size.As farmers retire or move away, dairy operations are abandoned and the pastures and structures areconverted to livestock only production. Much cropland is rented by nearby dairy, livestock and cropfarmers.

The Village of Pepin has been an important asset to the community. The Town of Pepin completelysurrounds the lakeside village. Restaurants, bars, auto service, hardware, grocery, motels, gift and artshops, post office, churches, a small park and boat harbor are available for community use. Thepopulation of the village grows during the summer as visitors settle into summer homes and therecreational vehicle park fills with travelers and part-time residents. The Village is very welcoming totourists. The Harbor View Café and the Pickle Factory are popular attractions to visitors from distantlocations such as Rochester and the Minneapolis-St. Paul areas of Minnesota. Small businesses arelocated throughout the township and home-based business is a growing opportunity. Many ruralschools dotted the landscape in the 1800’s and early 1900’s. All of these schools were consolidated by1962, whereby all students in the township are now bussed to the K-12 school in the village.On the northern edge of the Town of Pepin the unincorporated village of Lund is located. The northside of this mostly residential development resides in Pierce County. Only a small store and two


churches remain to serve the community. A feed mill and feed store served the farmers of the area formore than one hundred years until it closed in 1998. Along the southern border of the Town of PepinState Highway 35 runs northwest to southeast near the Mississippi River and through the Village ofPepin. Deer Island provides a permanent home for a few residents and is a popular summer retreatproviding beachfront on Lake Pepin. A YMCA camping area is also located on the southeast end.

History of Town of Pepin

The geological history of the township begins with the river, the great Mississippi River, and the widestretch that borders the township named Lake Pepin. The southern and eastern borders of the townshipwere formed as water melted from the great glaciers of the North American continent. Much ofcurrent day Wisconsin, Minnesota and all of the nearby Canadian Provinces were covered by glacier.The glacial Lake Agassiz began flowing south through the glacial river, the Warren River, over 12,000years ago. As the water flow decreased sand flowing out of the Chippewa River was deposited into theMississippi River forming a delta which dammed the Mississippi flow forming Lake Pepin over 9,500years ago. The surrounding bluffs rise 450 feet above the water.

Many Native American tribes roamed the area over thousands of years before any European explorerstraveled into the territory which formed Pepin County. Early studies suggest woodland Indians livedin the region from 1000 B.C. Viking travelers may have been the first unrecorded travelers of the area.Father Louis Hennepin has recorded exploration by canoe in the area around 1680 and is believed to bethe first European to view the areas of Pepin County. In that same year the French explorer, DanielGreysolon du Lhut with a party including three brothers with the name Pepin, came to the area to makealliances with the Native American population. Lake Pepin is believed to be named in honor of Pepinthe Short, father of Charlemagne, and ruler of France from 740 to 768. Other historians believe thegreat lake was named after the Pepin brothers. Trapping and fur trading brought many Frenchadventurers into the area. Many bartering gatherings occurred with the Indians of the area. Fort St.Antoine was established by Nicholas Perrot in 1686 on Lake Pepin. He claimed the land along theMississippi as part of the realms of King Louis XIV on May 8, 1689. A historical marker alongHighway 35 is believed to be near the fort site which is in Stockholm Township. The Frenchabandoned the area for a number of years and other stone remnants lead some to believe the fort mayhave been south of the Village of Pepin. Six other forts were built around Lake Pepin by 1750 andused as fortified trading posts. The Pepin area post was abandoned in 1692.

All lands of Pepin County were claimed by the Wabasha band of Indians, the Dakota Sioux tribes,although this was disputed by the Chippewa Indians. Traditional lifeways of the native peoples whohad long inhabited the Lake Pepin region were disrupted as early as the eighteenth century, whencultural groups from other regions fled conflict in the east to settle in the area. The British gainedcontrol of the region in 1763. The English explorer, Jonathan Carver traveled by canoe down theChippewa River in 1766. The fur trading continued into the late 1800’s. The first steamboat traveledup the Mississippi in 1811. The Dakota Indians gradually moved west and south as the Ojibway tribesroamed into west central Wisconsin. Fights were common among Indian groups in the 1800’s. In atreaty of December 29, 1837 the government gained an agreement with the Dakota to release all landseast of the Mississippi. Some resistance continued between settlers and tribal members as late as the1850’s and 1860’s. A major battle was fought in 1851. The Dakota and Ojibway continued in battlesduring this time also. Epidemics of cholera, smallpox, and other diseases between 1845 and 1851 had adevastating effect on local populations


Wisconsin was successively part of the original Northwest Territory (1788-1800), Indiana Territory(1800-1809), Illinois Territory (1809-1818), and Michigan Territory (1818-1836) before it became aterritory in its own right. Wisconsin became a territory in 1836 and statehood was completed in 1848with a capitol located at Madison. The treaty with the Indians of 1837 transferred approximately10,000 square miles to the new nation. This area was designated as Chippewa County and included allof Pepin County. Dunn County was formed in 1856 and in 1858 Pepin County was formed from thesouthern part of Dunn County. The county contained 244 square miles or 145,127 acres. There ismuch history about the location of the county seat as it started in Pepin, moved to Durand and thenArkansaw and back to Durand by 1884.

The area was originally surveyed by Samuel Durham in 1849. From survey records much of the areawas described as thinly timbered with oak and brush. This terrain was easier to clear than some areasof the country and helped early settlers prepare the land for crops. Horses were in heavy use as theregion was farmed and cows, hogs and chickens were raised on nearly all of the early homesteads ofthe township. The heavy forests were found north of the county and that industry influenced thedevelopment of the area for many years.

Lumber mills were a key factor for development of the Wisconsin Territory and many of the largestsaw mills were on the north reaches of the Chippewa River. The mills at Menomonie and ChippewaFalls were built in the 1830’s. Pineries of the north employed many workers who assembled log raftsand floated them down the Chippewa River. The logs continued down the Mississippi into Iowa andMissouri. The lumbermen could return to Lake Pepin by steamboat but the Chippewa was too shallowfor large boat travel. Much travel by foot occurred along the Chippewa as lumberman returned to themills nearly 45 miles upriver.

John McCain from Pennsylvania worked as a lumberman from the Menomonie lumber camp in 1842.He staked a claim for land near the Village of Pepin in 1845. In 1846 with the help of a cousin,William Boyd Newcomb, a cabin was built, the first known residential home in the Town of Pepin.The location was called McCain’s landing and also Johnstown. A cabin located within Village limitswas erected by Newcomb in 1850. Platting of land for a village was completed in 1855 and namedLakeport. John McCain built a brickyard on his farm in 1854 and many village structures were builtwith the bricks produced. Anna Barry, born in Pennsylvania in 1846, came to the village in 1857. Thevillage of Pepin was incorporated in 1860, but then lost its political structure rights in 1864. Thetownship population from the 1860 census was 442. The censuses of 1870 and 1880 include residentsof the township and the village area with no distinction of location. The first mill in Pepin Townshipwas built by Isaac Ingalls in 1853. This settler was a fourth cousin to Lansford Ingalls, grandfather ofLaura Ingalls Wilder. The village was again incorporated in 1882 with a population count of 339.The most famous woman of the area was born February 7, 1867 to parents Charles and Caroline(Quiner) Ingalls. The Ingalls first came to the Township and settled just southeast of Lund in 1862.After two years in Missouri and Kansas, the Ingalls returned to Wisconsin. The country school for theIngalls children was named Barry Corners. In 1874 the family moved to Minnesota.Shallow bottom craft eventually were built to travel the Chippewa River when the river had good waterflow. This diminished travel to the Village of Pepin. Pioneers from the East continued to populate thesurrounding area. A grist mill was built on Bogus Creek, one of the first flour mills to be located onthe Mississippi between Hudson and Prairie du Chien. In 1882 a pontoon bridge operated across theriver to Reads Landing. First steps to build a railroad through the Town of Pepin began in 1883. TheWinona, Alma and Northern Railroad with a line from East Winona to Menomonie, built a line toAlma. In 1885, Chicago Burlington and Northern Railroad Company organized and purchased the


Alma Line and the railroad company. Passenger, freight and stock cars were traveling to Pepin in1886 as the final link over the Chippewa River was celebrated on July 22nd of that year. The watertank for steam locomotive operation in Pepin was abandoned by 1928. A water tank and coal chutewas built on the line near Stockholm. Double tracks were laid through the Village of Pepin in 1929.

The building of dams in the 1930’s aided the use of the river for transportation of farm produce andother goods. Steamboats and barges filled the rivers in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Lake Pepinwas the location for harvesting of water mussels and clams for buttons and pearls well into the 1900’s.Fishing provided many with a worthy profession and lifestyle, which continues on a small scale todayfor one company in the Pepin Village. The lake was also a great transportation asset as ferries carriedpassengers and goods across the water to Minnesota villages and cities.

Country roads were formed up and down the bluffs of the area of Pepin Township. Along theChippewa River a road to the small town of Arkansaw developed during the lumbering days. The everflooding nature of the Chippewa probably lead to the abandonment of this road and County N becamea new route to Arkansas and Durand by way of the small river village of Ella in Frankfurt Township.Today the only state road remaining is Highway 35. It travels along the Mississippi River and throughthe Village of Pepin. As late as 1930 this highway connected with County N and traveled to Durand.This town offered the closest river crossing over the Chippewa River for many years. The highwaythen traveled the current Highway 25 route back to Nelson, Wisconsin. Many small bridges were builtto improve travel throughout the countryside. The great number of creeks bringing water from springsin the bluffs and rainfall to Lake Pepin made travel difficult until culverts and small bridges could beinstalled. But travel to the south across the Chippewa River was only easy for the trains that had abridge at Trevino. In 1933 the bridge crossing the Chippewa River was funded and built connectingPepin County with Buffalo County. The dike road through the swamps of the Tiffany Wildlife areawas a great achievement and opened access to another route to the County Seat of Durand throughBuffalo County. Other river towns could now be reached quickly with an automobile by travelingthrough the town of Nelson. The Nelson to Wabasha dike road and bridge over the Mississippi atWabasha allowed faster travel to western states of the country and more ready access to the greatmedical facilities at Rochester, Minnesota.

Old State Highway 183, heading north away from the Village and past the likely location of LauraIngalls Wilder’s childhood cabin, is now maintained by Pepin County as Highway CC. This roadenters Pierce County at Lund. Other county roads include Highway N and I. On the periphery CountyJ and SS are located on the north and northeast boundaries of the township. A 1930 Atlas and Farmer’sDirectory of Pepin County shows 8 named regions for the Town of Pepin. Some areas of thecommunity are still known by these names which were Sabylund, Barry Corner, Farm Hill, Big Hill,Bogus Creek, Lost Creek, Hicks Valley and the area near the Village of Pepin was marked as PepinGrades. These same names can be found on many of the major town roads which cross through theTown of Pepin.

(Sources for historical data include Pepin County History, by Pat Parks, Karen Broadhead and Cindy Baader, TaylorPublishing Company of Dallas, TX, copyright 1985, Parish of the Assumption by Very Rev. Father Stephen Anderl,published by Weber Publishing Company, Park Falls, WI, copyright 1960, Atlas of Great Lakes Indian History: NativeAmerican Communities in Wisconsin, 1600 – 1960.)


General Planning Goals

The Wisconsin statutes regarding comprehensive planning for municipalities request each communityto list goals and objectives related to future growth and development. Specific goals can be found insections of this plan under the nine element areas which are required to be addressed. The state list ofgoals which provide a broad guideline for developing comprehensive plans follows:

1. Promotion of the redevelopment of lands with existing infrastructure and public services and themaintenance and rehabilitation of existing residential, commercial and industrial structures.

2. Encouragement of neighborhood designs that support a range of transportation choices.3. Protection of natural areas, including wetlands, wildlife habitats, lakes, woodlands, open spaces

and groundwater resources.4. Protection of economically productive areas, including farmland and forests.5. Encouragement of land-uses, densities and regulations that promote efficient development patterns

and relatively low municipal, state governmental and utility costs.6. Preservation of cultural, historic and archaeological sites.7. Encouragement of cooperation and coordination among nearby units of government.8. Building of community identity by revitalizing main streets and enforcing design standards.9. Providing an adequate supply of affordable housing for individuals of all income levels throughout

each community.10. Providing adequate infrastructure and public services and an adequate supply of developable land

to meet existing and future market demand for residential, commercial and industrial uses.11. Promoting the expansion or stabilization of the current economic base and the creation of a range

of employment opportunities at the state, regional and local levels.12. Balancing individual property rights with community interests and goals.13. Planning and development of land uses that create or preserve varied and unique urban and rural

communities.14. Providing an integrated, efficient, and economical transportation system that affords mobility,

convenience and safety and that meets the needs of all citizens, including transit-dependent anddisabled citizens.

Every community would agree the general goals for comprehensive planning are important and manymunicipalities need to make detailed plans and develop many new ordinances to ensure the goals canbe achieved. Small rural communities which do not have critical growth and development concerns,are able to allow more individual choice and freedom in business selection and land use. The townshipcan then grow in a flexible manner allowing for the unknown.


Issues and Opportunities

INTRODUCTION

The Town of Pepin Comprehensive Plan will consider the state goals and the concerns of the citizens.A survey was mailed to the residents and land owners of the township in January 2009. 568 surveyswere mailed and 248 surveys were returned by February 10th. The survey results and the extensivecomments returned by members of the community have been used by the Planning Committee to guidethe development of the nine elements of the plan. The subgroups working on each one of the nineelements have used the survey results and the multiple pages listing all of the comments entered on thesurvey forms to compile the information in this plan. Current data relating to existing conditions,statistics for the township and other government levels, and lists of available programs and agenciesable to assist with specific topics related to each element have been researched from many sources.Local government offices and many web sites on the internet have provided information found in thisplan. A number of comprehensive plans from other Wisconsin municipalities have been reviewed forinformation and ideas for the Town of Pepin Comprehensive Plan.

GOALS

Develop a plan consistent with the rural character of Town of Pepin.Residential development is increasingArea is rural, agricultural, scenic and not heavily developed with much open space, rolling

hills, many forested areas with steep slopesCommunity supports agricultural heritageProtection of forests, streams, creeks, Chippewa River and Lake Pepin is very important to the

desirability of living in the Township

Consider the economic factors that have an impact on growth and development for the Town ofPepin’s Comprehensive Plan.

No large city is close to the communityNo large commercial or industrial businesses reside in the areaLocal revenue is used entirely for roads, a school and limited public servicesAnnexations, mergers, consolidations and sharing of resources must be consideredTax base is residential and property taxes are higher for Pepin County than other nearbycounties

OBJECTIVES

Determine need for regulations and increased zoning control in land use decisionsMaintain rural character and livability of the areaEvaluate current environmental conditions to determine whether additional programs or projects are

needed to protect natural resources and the health and well-being of Town of Pepin residents.

STRENGTHS

Scenic beautyRural character of area and small town atmosphere of Village of PepinTourism (Visitor traffic is heavy during Spring through Fall)Sound agricultural economy when commodity prices are sufficient


Small town school is desired and receives awards for achievementsVery low crimeRural roads maintained and sufficientGood volunteer fire department and equipment

WEAKNESSES

Pepin County is a very small county in the stateCellular phone and internet systems need updating and improvementsSchool district is not well supported by state fundingLimited job opportunityHigher paying jobs require longer commutes

This element requires general statistics be provided about the township, most of which come fromCensus data and state agencies. This data needs to be used in the development of the overall plan andsimilar information can be found in other plan elements. A listing of issues and opportunities followsthe demographic information.

Population of Town of PepinThe 2000 Census reported the population to be 580 people of which 289 were Female and 291 wereMale. The population density was 12.8 people per square mile (4.9/km²). The racial makeup of thetown was 99.14% White, 0.34% African American, 0.34% Native American, and 0.17% from two ormore races. 0.69% of the population was Hispanic or Latino of any race. In the town the populationwas spread out with 25.0% under the age of 18, 6.2% from 18 to 24, 23.8% from 25 to 44, 30.3% from45 to 64, and 14.7% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 42 years. Top 6 reportednationalities: German, Norwegian, Swedish, Irish, English, French.

The projections for population as reported by the State of Wisconsin Demography Services Center areas follows:

2000 Census 2005 Estimate 2010 Projection 2015 Proj. 2020 Proj. 2025 Proj. 2030 Proj.580 647 663 682 702 719 728

This projection predicts the population of the Township will increase by 148 persons for the 30 yearperiod which is an increase of 25.5%. Another agency disagrees with this projection. The MississippiRiver Regional Planning Commission provides the following data:2000 Census 2005 Estimate 2010 Projection 2015 Proj. 2020 Proj. 2025 Proj.

580 647 614 621 630 625

Both agencies estimate 2006 population at 660, but the MRRPC projects declining population for theTown of Pepin in the future. Some areas of Pepin County are expected to grow in population.

Projected Population for Pepin County--Slowest Growing and Smallest CountiesMenominee County, Wisconsin's smallest at 2000, is projected to remain the smallest through 2035,and will also lose about 20 percent of its population. Wisconsin's ten smallest counties are located at adistance from most metropolitan centers. In all cases but one (Pepin County), population growth isexpected to be quite minimal. In addition, most of these counties' gains will be marked by increases inretiree populations rather than younger cohorts.


Ten Counties with Smallest Projected Populations at 2035County Census 2000 Projection

2035NumericChange

PercentChange

PopulationRank, 2000

PopulationRank, 2035

ASHLAND 16,866 17,374 508 3% 58 63

LAFAYETTE 16,137 16,682 545 3% 60 64

PRICE 15,822 15,948 126 1% 62 65

RUSK 15,347 15,350 3 0% 64 66

BUFFALO 13,804 15,137 1,333 10% 67 67

FOREST 10,024 10,135 111 1% 68 68

PEPIN 7,213 9,086 1,873 26% 69 69

IRON 6,861 6,914 53 1% 70 70

FLORENCE 5,088 5,243 155 3% 71 71

MENOMINEE 4,562 3,647 -915 -20% 72 72

Wisconsin Population 2035, A Report on Projected State and County Populations and Households for the Period 2000-2035 and MunicipalPopulations, 2000-2030, October 2008 by David Egan-Robertson, Don Harrier and Phil Wells, Demographic Services Center, Division ofIntergovernmental Relations, Wisconsin Department of Administration

Households of Town of PepinThe 2000 Census reported 232 households and 168 families residing in the town. 199 households wereowner occupied and 33 were renter occupied. There were 232 households out of which 30.6% hadchildren under the age of 18 living with them, 63.4% were married couples living together, 5.2% had afemale householder with no husband present, and 27.2% were non-families. 23.3% of all householdswere made up of individuals and 9.1% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older.The average household size was 2.50 and the average family size was 2.97. The future projections forhouseholds for the Town of Pepin as reported by the State of Wisconsin Demography Services Centerare as follows:

2000 Census 2005 Estimate 2010 Projection 2015 Proj. 2020 Proj. 2025 Proj. 2030 Proj.232 262 279 293 306 320 331

The number of households is projected to increase by 99 over the 30 year period which is an increaseof 42.7%. The 2000 Census also reported 275 total housing units with 41 vacant including 24 listed asfor seasonal, recreational or occasional use. Housing density was 6.0/sq. mi. (2.3/km2) Rentalvacancy rate was listed as 5.7%.

Educational Attainment--Town of Pepin--2000 Census Data

Population 25 years and over 391 100%Less than 9th grade 17 4.39th to 12th grade, no diploma 33 8.4High School graduate or GED 166 42.5Some college, no degree 78 19.9Associate degree 26 6.6Bachelor’s degree 39 10.0Graduate of professional degree 32 8.2Percent high school grad or higher 87.2 %Percent bachelor’s degree or higher 18.2 %


Income Data for Town of Pepin

2000 Census Data: The median income for a household in the town was $44,444, and the medianincome for a family was $51,053. Males had a median income of $29,722 versus $17,361 for females.The per capita income for the town was $18,902. About 4.1% of families and 4.9% of the populationwere below the poverty line, including 6.1% of those under age 18 and 6.3% of those age 65 or over.

Per Capita Income Table

2001 2002 2003 2004

Pepin County $23,551 $23,947 $24,614 $26,471

State of Wisconsin 29,400 30,025 30,664 32,166

United States 30,574 30,810 31,484 33,050

Future Income Trends

The following information summarizes data about income in the west central Wisconsin area. Manyresidents commute to other counties for jobs and some even travel to the Minneapolis-St. Paul area forwork. Long commutes will greatly impact family and personal income when gas prices increase in thenear future, unless very efficient vehicles are produced or new, less expensive transportation modes aredeveloped. The article from which this summary was developed was written by Scott Hodek,Economist for the State of Wisconsin West Central Region. The most recent personal income dataavailable is for the year 2006 and much data is from estimates only. More reliable information will notbe available until the 2010 census is completed.

”Eau Claire County still has the highest total personal income (TPI) in the area, at over three billiondollars - Eau Claire is also the largest population center in West Central. However, St. Croix County isnarrowing the gap, at about $2.7 billion in 2006. St. Croix had the fastest growing TPI in the area, witha five year growth rate of 33 percent. Barron and Clark counties saw the slowest growth, at around 14percent.

Total personal income includes income from three main sources: net earnings; dividends, interest andrent; and transfer receipts. Net earnings make up the vast majority of income, with the remainingpercentage divided between the other two components. However, despite this common pattern, theexact distribution can tell us a lot about an area.

Not surprisingly, among the West Central counties, net earnings made up the highest proportion of TPIin St. Croix. Seventy-seven percent of St. Croix's TPI was made up of net earnings, reflecting thehigher wages earned by the small army of commuters who cross the border to work in the Twin Citiesmetro area. Another Minnesota-border county came in second – 73 percent of Pierce County's TPI wascomposed of net earnings. We can see the effects of the border counties' proximity to the Twin Citiesmetro in the adjustment for residency, an adjustment to net earnings taken to allocate income to thecorrect county of residence, rather than the county where the place of work is located. This adjustmentmade up over 45 percent of St. Croix's net earnings – almost half of St. Croix's total net earnings weremade outside the county. Pierce's adjustment was even higher, at over 55 percent! St. Croix also hadthe fastest growth in net earnings, up 33 percent since 2001. The lowest growth in net earnings wasseen in Barron County, a five year growth rate of only 14 percent.


TPI is heavily influenced by an area's population, since more people generally leads to a higher TPI.Dividing TPI by a region's population gives us per capita personal income (PCPI), a measure ofincome per resident, and a more useful tool for comparing regions. St. Croix County had the highestPCPI in West Central Wisconsin, at $34,319. St. Croix's PCPI ranked 12th highest out of the state's 72counties, again attesting to the higher wages earned by commuters into the Twin Cities. Forcomparison, the average PCPI in Wisconsin was $34,405 in 2006, while PCPI in the Twin Citiesmetropolitan area was $44,237. However, St. Croix did not have the fastest PCPI growth in 2006. EauClaire's PCPI grew at 5.2 percent, faster than the statewide average of 4.8 percent, and ranking itsgrowth rate at 17th among the state's 72 counties. Student populations often lower PCPI for a city dueto the high number of part-time, often lower paying jobs. Students are included in populationconsiderations for PCPI calculations. The lowest PCPI in West Central was found in the very ruralClark County, ranked 66th in the state, at $24,376.”

Employment

Town of Pepin Total employment by Industry (2000 Census Data): 322

Leading industries and number employed (2000 Census Data):

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing/Hunting, Mining 50

Educational, Health, Social Services 94

Manufacturing 58

Transportation, Warehousing, Utilities 28

Retail Trade 25

Regional Employment ForecastsWest Central Wisconsin Occupational Projections for 2006-2016 are estimated to grow from 178,630jobs to 192,050. This growth includes 1,340 new jobs and 4,100 replacement jobs as the averageannual openings. The Estimated Salary for these jobs is $32,996 with an entry level wage of $8.23 andan experienced wage of $19.68. This estimate covers the 9 county region including Barron, Chippewa,Clark, Dunn, Eau Claire, Pepin, Pierce, Polk and St. Croix counties. The following table lists selectedemployment areas where most job increases are expected for the nine county area.

Estimated EmploymentIndustry Title2006 2016 % Change

Construction, Mining, Natural Resources 178,630 192,050 7.5%Trade (Retail, etc.) 29,910 30,400 1.6%Transportation and Utilities 8,570 9,670 12.8%Financial Activities 7,430 8,180 10.1%Educational Services 16,240 16,930 4.2%Hospitals 7,710 9,140 18.5%Leisure and Hospitality 17,840 19,850 11.3%Information, Professional Services, Other Services 21,210 24,080 13.5%Source: Office of Economic Advisors, Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, November 2008


The survey results and comments present a general list of citizen concerns about the Town of Pepin.The comments also provide ideas about improving the community and what may be the concerns ofthe future. The following lists summarize comments provided by residents and landowners in thesurveys returned to the Plan Committee in February 2009.

IssuesMaintaining ground water qualityMaintaining water quality in creeks, rivers and streamsMaintaining local roads

Desire for black top roads and inability to increase taxation to pay for themSupporting the local school

Taxpayer concerns over support of school are increasingFarmland protection and preservationMaintaining harmony between residential areas and agricultural businessesLoss of permanent residentsLack of employment opportunities in the areaLack of Industry and Manufacturing businesses

No industrial park in the township—only in the villageNo natural gas available

Older mobile homes moved in as rental unitsControl of junk in residential areas and in forests and fieldsProximity of moderate-sized cities when gas prices are high againAffordable high speed internet access for all residents and businessesSeifert Addition (Pugville) water quality problems

OpportunitiesCitizens want to improve communication between the community and the town board.The rural character and setting is important to the community and we need to decide if any restrictions

related to development should be planned now to protect it.This is a very scenic area including beautiful natural landscapes, rolling hills, bluff tops and valleys,

great forested hills intermingled with crop land and creeks and streams. We need to decide ifany restrictions related to development should be planned now to protect these assets.

The following are some of our assets and others are items of interest or areas of opportunity to improveour community, improve tourism and to make the area more desirable for our future and futureresidents. We should consider these in our planning as well.

Proximity and access to Lake PepinBirthplace of Laura Ingalls WilderSupport of Road BikingSupport of Birding VisitorsDevelopment of home-based businesses

Increase residency, especially familiesIncrease home building in appropriate locationsHunting and fishing availabilityPublic lands (DNR controlled)Increased and/or improved boat landings

Visitor (Tourist) attractions from Villages of Pepin and StockholmHistorical interest in country schools, rural churches, agricultural architecture and the

birthplace of LauraInterest in Golf Course—opposed by someDeer Island (Klampe Addition)Moderate-sized cities within 50 miles (Winona, Eau Claire, Menomonie, Red Wing)


TransportationIntroduction

There are a number of transportation facilities available in the town of Pepin ranging from town roads to statehighways. Many residents that commute to and from work as well as area farmers rely on road facilities to meetthese needs. There are limited opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle transportation. The Chippewa River andLake Pepin are navigable waterways and therefore can be used as a mode of recreation. Other modes of transit,including light rail and air transportation are not directly available to the Town residents. Currently there are noavailable forms of public transit in the township.

General Policies

Supply adequate transportation systems now and in the future, while making every effort to preserve naturalresources and to prevent undue strain on the environment.

Basic Objectives

Assess existing transportation facilitiesReview statewide planning effortsDevelop a long term plan for transportation facilities in the townshipDevelop goals and objectives to meet current and future transportation needs.

Selected Survey Results

95 % of the respondents feel that the roads and bridges are adequate for mobility in township90 % of the respondents feel that the roads and bridges are sufficiently maintained.There were numerous written comments on the desire for more blacktop town roads.

Road Classifications

Principle arterials: Serve intra-urban trips. Carry high traffic volumes (interstates & freeways)Minor arterials: Serve cities, large communities and other large traffic generators.Major collectors: Provide service to moderate sized communities and links them to nearby

Population centers and higher function routes.Minor collectors: Collect traffic from local roads and provide links to all smaller communities

Locally important traffic generators and higher function roads.Local roads: All roads not classified as arterial or collector are local functioning roads.

Local Road network

Principle arterials: NoneMinor arterials: NoneMajor Collector: State Highway 35 The Great River RoadMinor collectors: County roads CC, I, J, N, SSLocal roads: Township roadsState Highway 35 runs 5 ½ miles through the town and 1 ½ miles through the village ofPepin. It runs northwest to southeast from the Stockholm town line to Buffalo County atthe Chippewa River. It is a major traffic route to Red Wing, Prescott and the Twin Citiesto the Northwest and to Winona, La Crosse and Madison to the southeast.


County roads CC and N as minor collectors are the major north, south routes in the township.Both connect state highway 35 with US highway 10.

Maintenance Responsibility

State of Wisconsin 5 ½ milesPepin County 18.61 milesTown of Pepin 62.27 miles

Total miles of public roads in Pepin township 86.38

Paser Rating System

In 2007, the Town of Pepin completed its pavement surface evaluation rating (PASER) forall town roads in accordance with WisDOT requirements. PASER is a visual inspection systemTo develop a condition rating for community roads that must be done once every two years.PASER is an important tool for small government planning because it gives a picture of roadConditions on all roads and can identify candidates for maintenance and rehabilitation. SurfaceDefects, cracking, potholes and drainage are all examined during a typical PASER evaluation.PASER report numbers range from 1 unacceptable to 10 excellent.

PASER rating Miles2 1.833 19.794 23.405 4.066 1.207 3.868 4.029 2.3510 1.46

Roadway Improvements

Improvements to local roads are critical for maintaining an adequate and safe roadway system.Future road improvements are generally based on current road conditions, with the intent to keepall roads intact and useable on a daily basis. Future roadway improvements need to be flexiblebecause of the possibility of unforeseen emergencies or disasters that may arise from year toyear or even day to day.

Funding for local roadway improvements is generally done through the town’s general fund byeither local tax funds or state programs. One program that the town has used in the past is theTown Road Improvement Program (TRIP) which provides funds to units of government forimproving seriously deteriorating town roads. TRIP will fund up to 50 percent of total eligible projectcosts, with the balance matched by the local unit of government. A TRIP discretionary (TRIP-D)program is also available for transportation improvement projects exceeding $100,000.


Town Road Plan

Over the last ten years the township road plan has been to blacktop all hills and erosion prone areas.After a close examination of all town roads in the spring of 2008 it was decided that the focus for thenext five years will be for the repair or replacement of many of the numerous culverts in the township.This will be done along with regular maintenance as funds allow.

County Roads

Pepin County has funds budgeted for normal maintenance of the county roads in Pepin township. Nomajor construction is scheduled in the near future.

State Roads

There is no major construction scheduled for State Hwy 35 in the near future.

Other Transportation Systems and Facilities

AirThere are no scheduled passenger airports to be built in Pepin County in the future. There is oneprivate airfield in the Town of Pepin in section 4 on Bogus Road. The Durand Municipal airfield islocated in Buffalo County, Maxville Township, off state highway 25.

There is one light aircraft airport nearby. The Red Wing Municipal airport is located in pierce countyon state hwy 35 about 20 to 25 miles from Pepin Township. It provides general aviation access to localcommunities with a 5,000 foot paved runway. There are two regional airports in the area.Chippewa Valley regional airport in Eau Claire has regularly scheduled passenger flights to the TwinCities and Rhinelander. Rochester International airport has regular daily passenger flights to the TwinCities, Chicago and Detroit. Minneapolis-St. Paul international airport is the largest in the area as it isone of the busiest airports in the U.S.A.

RailThe Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad runs through Pepin Township along highway 35and Lake Pepin. It a major freight carrier with as many as 50 trains in a 24 hour period. It is part of asystem that moves freight from coast to coast. The closest passenger train is Amtrak with stations inRed Wing and Winona. At the present time the States of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Illinois areworking on a plan for a bullet train that would go from St. Paul to Chicago.

Pedestrian FacilitiesMost town roads in the town of Pepin have limited shoulder areas and the speed limits are usuallymore the 45 MPH unless posted otherwise. A motor vehicle creates a dust hazard for pedestrians ongravel roads. These conditions hamper safe pedestrian travel. State highway 35 has wide pavedshoulders that are good for safe pedestrian and bike traffic.

Mass TransitMass transit is not available in the Town of Pepin given its low density of development. The density ofdevelopment in the town cannot provide the ridership necessary to support a bus route. There is noplan to establish service in the next 20 years. Greyhound lines provides scheduled service across theUnited States and Canada and has bus terminals in Eau Claire and Winona.


Special TransitThe only current method of specialized transportation is through the Pepin County senior services.They will arrange transportation for any resident of Pepin County that is 60+ or handicapped.

Bike and Walking TrailsThere are no bike or walking trails in the Town of Pepin. The closest trails are the Chippewa Riverstate trail and the Red Cedar state trail. The Chippewa River trail follows the river from Durand toCornell in Chippewa county. The Red Cedar trail begins at the Menomonie Depot and runs near theRed Cedar River for 14 ½ miles and connects to the Chippewa River State trail. Both trailsaccommodate walking, bicycling and cross country skiing. The Township, working with the Countyshould consider upgrading one or more of the blacktop town roads for biking and walking as fundsare available. A good example would be Sand Ridge Road that extends into the village of Pepin.County roads CC,I and N in Pepin Township are heavily used for biking and should continue to bemaintained with road surface and shoulders that are safe for biking and walking.

Freight TransportationA large amount of the freight going through the Township is transported via the BNSF railroad,however there is also much freight transported by truck given the truck traffic on highway 35. There isalso heavy barge traffic on the Mississippi river (Lake Pepin) during the navigation season.

Water TransportationThe Mississippi river (Lake Pepin) and the Chippewa River are considered navigable waterways by theWisconsin DNR. A navigable waterway is defined as a body of water that has bed and banks and theability to float the stream in a canoe or other small craft. The Chippewa River can be used by smallsport fishing boats during most times of the year. The Mississippi River can be used by most any kindof sport or pleasure craft. Traffic on these waters is not likely to increase in the near future fortransportation purposes, however recreational use will most likely increase.

Snowmobile Trails (Recreational)The county snowmobile trail enters Pepin Township from Frankfort Township near County Road N. ItParallels county road N to the village of Pepin. It then goes northwest through the Town of Stockholmand into Pierce county.

Rustic RoadsThere are no Rustic Roads in the Town of Pepin . The town should consider nominating a qualifyingroad(s) for the state’s Rustic road program. The closest Rustic Road is #R-51 in the Town of MaidenRock, Pierce County. It is 4.3 miles long and extends from county road CC to Pierce county road AA.

State PlansWisconsin State Highway Plan 2020The state highway plan 2020 sets forth investment needs and priorities for the state’s trunk highways.Backbone and collector routes have been identified.

Midwest Regional Rail SystemThe Midwest Regional Rail System is a plan to improve the rail network in the Midwest. Passengerservice would be available in Eau Claire and Minneapolis/St. Paul.


Wisconsin Bicycle Transportation Plan 2020This plan promotes bicycling between communities. The suitability of township roads for bicycletraffic may be a subject of interest.

State Recreational Trails Network PlanThis plan (DNR) encourages communities to develop additional trails linking to the statewide trailsystem. Planners could work with the DNR and the DOT to develop such plans.

Wisconsin State Airport System Plan 2020This plan seeks to preserve and improve the 100 public use airports that are part of the system.

HousingIntroduction

Most townships contain a higher percentage of single family homes than any other type of housingstock. A variety of considerations need to be made when looking at the future in terms of housingstock. Housing should fit the current needs of local residents and the town must look toward the futureas new residents move in and the population ages.

General Policies

The intent of the housing element is to provide basic information on the housing stock in thecommunity, to analyze trends, and to identify potential problems and opportunities to accommodatethe varied housing needs of current and new residents.

Basic Objectives

Assess local housing conditionsReview State and Federal housing programsProject the number of households to be added over the next twenty yearsIdentify housing issues and opportunitiesDevelop goals to accommodate existing and future housing needs


Does adequate housing exist in the township 90 % Yes 10 % No

Support for the following types of HousingHousing for Seniors 84 %Single Family Housing 81 %Duplexes or Apartments 52 %Residential Subdivisions 48 %

Existing Housing

Housing Units 1970 1980 1990 2000Town 297 332 355 273County 2357 2881 2919 3036


State 1,472,332 1,863,897 2,055,676 2,321,144Age of Housing Stock

A good indicator in any given community of the quality of housing is the relative age of housing stock.The following is the percentage of housing stock by age for township and county.

Year Structure Built Town of Pepin Pepin County

1999 to March 2000 1.8 % 1.9 %1995 to 1998 3.6 % 5.6 %1990 to 1994 4.0 % 3.8 %1980 to 1989 7.6 % 10.4 %1970 to 1979 12.4 % 16.8 %1960 to 1969 17.1 % 10.2 %1940 to 1959 15.3 % 15.0 %1939 or earlier 38.2 % 36.4 %

Types of Housing

The two most common types of housing units in the township and the county are one unit single familyhomes and mobile homes. The following is the percentage of types of housing units for the townshipand county.

Units/type of structure Town of Pepin Pepin County

1- unit detached 91.3 % 78.8 %1- unit attached 0 1.5 %2 units 0 2.6 %3 or 4 units 0 2.4 %5 to 9 units 1.5 % 2.5 %10 to 19 units 0 3.2 %20 or more units 0 2.2 %Mobile Home 7.3 % 6.8 %Boat,RV,Van,etc. 0 0 .1 %

Rooms

The following shows the number of rooms by percentage of total housing units for the township andcounty.

Rooms Town of Pepin Pepin County

1 room 1.8 % 0.5 %2 rooms 0 1.6 %3 rooms 4.0 % 5.9 %4 rooms 14.9 % 12.0 %5 rooms 16.0 % 20.2 %6 rooms 21.5 % 18.5 %7 rooms 22.2 % 17.3 %8 rooms 10.9 % 12.9 %


9 or more rooms 8.7 % 11.0 %

Value of Housing

The following shows the percentage of housing with different values for the Town of Pepin and PepinCounty. These values are for owner-occupied units, not rental units.

Value Town of Pepin Pepin CountyLess than $ 50,000 17.1 % 16.5 %$ 50,000 to $ 99,999 31.6 % 55.9 %$ 100,000 to $ 149,999 27.6 % 19.7 %$ 150,000 to $ 199,999 9.2 % 4.9 %$ 200,000 to $ 299,999 7.9 % 2.0 %$ 300,000 to $ 499,999 3.9 % 0.6 %$ 500,000 to $ 999,999 2.6 % 0.3 %

Mortgage Status

53.9 % of the housing units in the Town of Pepin have a mortgage, with the median monthly cost of $1,025.00. 46.1 % are not mortgaged

52.9 % of the housing units in Pepin County have a mortgage, with the median monthly cost of$ 772.00. 47.1 % are not mortgaged.

Monthly mortgage costs as a percentage of monthly household income.

Town of Pepin Pepin CountyLess than 15 percent 40.8 % 43.0 %15 to 19 percent 21.1 % 19.7 %20 to 24 percent 14.5 % 13.4 %25 to 29 percent 5.3 % 7.7 %30 to 34 percent 7.9 % 4.6 %35 percent or more 10.5 % 11.3 %Not computed 0 0.3 %

Gross Rent

The median gross monthly rent paid in the Town of Pepin is $ 313.00.The median gross monthly rent paid in Pepin County is $ 368.00.

Housing Unit Comparison

The following set of numbers shows the comparison of the number of housing units for all thetownships and the Pepin County total.

Town of Albany 189Town of Durand 245Town of Frankfort 161


Town of Lima 227Town of Pepin 273Town of Stockholm 65Town of Waterville 351Town of Waubeek 130

Pepin County 3036

Median Value of Housing

The median value for housing in Pepin County is $ 79,200.00The median value for housing in the State of Wisconsin is $ 109,900.00

The following numbers show the median home values for all the townships and their rank in thecounty.

Median Home Value Rank in the CountyTown of Albany $ 93,900 5Town of Durand $ 101,100 4Town of Frankfort $ 70,000 7Town of Lima $ 75,600 6Town of Pepin $ 101,400 3Town of Stockholm $ 325,000 1Town of Waterville $ 61,700 8Town of Waubeek $ 103,300 2

Special Housing Needs

In the past, homeowners have taken care of their own special housing needs. The Town of Pepin hasno resources to provide for special housing needs. Residents are encouraged to use the resources of theUW-Extension programs to assess their special housing needs. The following are programs andsources available for those with special housing needs.

State and Federal Housing Programs

Wisconsin Department of Administration, Division of Housing and Intergovernmental Relations.

Community Development Block Grant ProgramsHOME rental Housing DevelopmentLocal Housing Organization Grant ProgramLow-Income Weatherization ProgramRental Rehabilitation Program

Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago

Affordable Housing ProgramCommunity Investment Program

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development


Section 202/811. Capital advances for co-op housing for elderly or persons with disabilities.Multi-family FHA Mortgage Insurance.

Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority.

Affordable Housing Tax Credit ProgramFoundation GrantHome Improvement Loan Program

Future Housing Needs

The Mississippi River Planning Commission projects a slight decline in the population of the Town ofPepin in the next twenty years. Despite these numbers the township is expecting to see some newhousing starts each year. This being the case, township officials must weigh the effect of new housingon other elements of the plan, such as utilities, transportation and natural resources.

Goals

Allow residential development while preserving the integrity of the environment and the character ofthe township.

Conserve or improve the quality of existing housing and home values.

(The source of all numbers used in this element is either the United States Census Bureau or The Mississippi RiverRegional Planning Commission.)


Utilities and Community Facilities

Introduction

Community facilities are buildings, lands, services and programs that serve the public such as parks,schools, police and fire protection, health care facilities, solid waste and recycling facilities andlibraries. This element identifies and evaluates existing utilities and community facilities serving theTown of Pepin. Understanding the location, use and capacity of community facilities and utilities is animportant consideration when planning the future.

General Policies

Assure that utilities and community facilities are maintained and upgraded to help maintain or improvethe standard of living in the Town of Pepin.

Basic Objectives

The quality of life of the residents of the Town of Pepin greatly depends on the type and extent of thefacilities and service available in the community. The residents are concerned about health, safety,education and recreation. In order to sustain the reputation of the community and make it attractive topotential new residents, citizens must have a good understanding of current conditions.


The following are the percentage of respondents that rated the following good or excellent.

Rate the quality of ground water 75 %Fire Protection 42 %Emergency medical service 36 %School district 33 %

The following are the percentage of respondents that support the listed land use.

Recreational non-motorized e.g. parks, golf clubs 71 %Recreational motorized e.g go-cart, moto-cross 34 %

Existing Facilities and Services

Water FacilitiesThere is no public water system in the Town of Pepin. Residents get potable water from private wells.We encourage residents to get their water tested every year. The nearest public water system is in theVillage of Pepin.

Wastewater FacilitiesThe disposal of domestic and commercial wastewater in the Town of Pepin is handled through the useof private individual on-site wastewater disposal systems, often referred to as septic systems, whichgradually discharge the wastewater to underground drainage fields. There are five types of on-site


disposal system designs authorized for use today: conventional (underground), mound, pressuredistribution, at-grade holding tank and sand filter systems.

Storm Water ManagementA storm sewer system is not available in the Town of Pepin. Storm water is dispersed using the naturalcontours of the land in most sections of the township with drainage flowing down local creeks to theChippewa River and Lake Pepin. The Township also manages storm water runoff through the use ofdetention dams as well as practicing agricultural conservation techniques such as contour strips,diversions and barnyard waste controls. Where roads and other construction have disturbed ditches,culverts and bridges have to be used to allow continued drainage. These facilities have beenconstructed following state and county specifications. In rough terrain where heavy rainfall couldcause washing of unprotected soil, catch basins or rip-rapping have been installed to slow water flowand prevent damage. Planning for the future, storm water management may become an issue in theTown of Pepin as development continues. The Town of Pepin must work closely with the landconservation district, DNR and Pepin County to mitigate the adverse impacts of storm water runoff.

Solid Waste and Recycling FacilitiesThe Town of Pepin is part of the Pepin County solid waste management and recycling program. Thelocal collection site is in the Town of Pepin on Trail Road, east of the Village of Pepin. This site servesthe Village of Pepin, Town of Pepin, Town of Stockholm and Village of Stockholm. Residents taketheir garbage and recyclables to the collection site. Glass, metal cans, plastic, paper and cardboard arepatron pre-sorted for recycling. Garbage is hauled to an appropriate location. There are also containersfor building materials, appliances and other large items. An extra fee is charged for these items. Thereare also several private trash pickup services that serve Pepin Township residents.

Recreational FacilitiesSeveral outdoor recreational activities are available in the area. These include hunting, fishing,shooting and snowmobiling. There are active snowmobile and sportsman’s clubs in the area. ThePepin Sportsman’s Club located in the Township has a facility for trap and skeet-shooting. TheSportsman’s Club also hosts the annual tractor pull as well as other activities.

Lake Pepin is very popular and supports boating, fishing, sailing and water skiing as well as ice fishingand ice boating. The lake is large and deep enough to handle the largest pleasure craft. The ChippewaRiver is a rapid flowing river that supports fishing and canoeing. There is one public boat ramp in theTownship at Deer Island on Lake Pepin. Other area boat landings are in the Village of Pepin on lakePepin and in Frankfort Township at Ella on the Chippewa River also one in the Town of Nelson,Buffalo county on the Chippewa River off state highway 35. The state of Wisconsin owns andmaintains over 1,700 acres of public hunting land along the east side of the Town of Pepin next to theChippewa River.

Bike and Walking TrailsPlease refer to the transportation element.

LibraryThe Pepin public library in the Village of Pepin provides library services to the Town of Pepin.Residents of the Township accounted for 39 % of the library business in 2008. The Township budgetsa yearly payment to the library to help with operating expenses.


Energy SourcesElectrical power is provided to the Township by Xcel Energy and Pierce-Pepin Electric Cooperative.There are no natural gas pipelines within the township. Propane gas and fuel oil are provided byseveral dealers from the surrounding communities of Durand, Wabasha, Plum City and others.

Telecommunications FacilitiesCenturyTel serves the town of Pepin for local telephone communications. Several different companiesare available to provide long distance and internet services.

Access to wireless communication facilities is becoming more and more important. The FederalCommunications Act of 1996 increased the need for local governments to examine their zoningordinances to make sure they do not discriminate against cellular communications in land use andzoning decisions. There are two telecommunications towers in the Town of Pepin. One in Section 34on Bogus Road and one in Section 22 on Moline Lane.

CemeteriesOften overlooked, cemeteries are important community and cultural facilities. There are threecemeteries in the Township. Sabylund Cemetery on county road J, Lund Covenant on county road CC,both are in the northwest corner of the Township and Oakwood on county road CC north of the villageof Pepin. All three are privately owned and maintained.

Law EnforcementThe Pepin County Sheriff’s Department provides public safety services to the Township as part of theiroverall protection responsibility for the county. These services include 24-hour law enforcement,process service, court security and jail facilities. The Sheriff’s office and the Durand Police share thefacility and some personnel. The sheriff’s department has mutual aid with the surrounding counties aswell as the Durand Police, Pepin Police and Wisconsin State Highway Patrol.The Sheriff’s Department consists of:

SheriffChief Deputy5 Patrol officers

Fire ProtectionThe Lund Fire Department provides fire protection for the entire Township. They are a paid volunteerdepartment with 27 members. The Lund Fire District also covers the Town of Maiden Rock, Town ofStockholm and Village of Stockholm. The initial response to fire calls from township areas includesone engine/pumper, two tankers and a rescue unit. The department also has a ladder truck and a brushtruck. There are 6,000 gallons of water available for initial response. A dedicated well and a 40,000gallon underground reservoir for additional emergency water is located at the fire hall. Also hydrants atthe villages of Pepin and Maiden Rock can be used if needed. LFD has mutual aid with all thesurrounding departments and works close with the Pepin Village department for calls in the south halfof the township. The LFD is dispatched through Pepin County using the 911 emergency number.

Emergency Medical ServiceThe Pepin ambulance service with assistance from the Lund first responders provides medical serviceto the Town of Pepin. The service is available 24 hours a day and is dispatched through Pepin County


using the 911 emergency number. The Pepin Ambulance service is funded by the Town and Village ofPepin with a 50/50 split.

Health Care FacilitiesPepin Township residents have access to health care with clinics and hospitals in Durand, Wabashaand Red Wing. Specialized care can be received at Sacred Heart in Eau Claire, St. Elizabeth Hospitalin Wabasha and Luther/Middlefort in Eau Claire which are part of the Mayo system and Fairview RedWing which is in the University of Minnesota-Fairview system.

SchoolsA number of educational facilities are available to residents in the Town of Pepin. These range fromthe local school district to three universities within commuting distance. The entire Township isserved by the Pepin school district which operates a kindergarten through 12 program on a singlecampus. The Pepin School district covers the Town of Pepin, Village of Pepin, Town of Stockholm,Village of Stockholm and parts of the Town of Maiden Rock and the Town of Frankfort.The Town of Pepin is part of the Chippewa Valley Technical District with campuses in Menomonieand Eau Claire that offer several associate degree programs as well as technical diplomas. TheSoutheast Minnesota Technical college in Red Wing offers the same type of services. Higher educationdegree programs are available from three University of Wisconsin system schools within commutingdistance. They are Stout at Menomonie, UW Eau Claire and U W River Falls.

Municipal BuildingThe town owns a garage and pole building located in the Village of Pepin. Monthly meetings are heldin the Lions club building in the Village and elections are held in the Sportsman’s Club building in thetownship.

Child CareThe county maintains a list of licensed day care providers in Pepin County.

Future Needs

In analyzing the capacity of rural community services and facilities, and considering the lack of growthof the township, there does not appear to be a need to modify the current level of services provided.Looking at the capacity of existing utilities does not indicate a concern regarding future services.

The possible exception may be the school district. With decreasing or at best, stable enrollment andstate aids staying the same the portion of real estate taxes going to the school will remain high. Thecitizens along with the school board and our state representatives must work together to get the aidsthat we receive more in line with other school districts. It is important to keep the school in Pepin andnot consolidate with another school. Keeping the local school in operation is vital to the wellbeing ofthe Town of Pepin.


Agricultural ResourcesGoals

The family operated farm has always been the mainstay in Pepin Township. With over 17,000 acres oftillable farmland the relevance of this industry must not be overlooked. Trends indicate that while thenumber of farms has sharply decreased, the average size of a farm has increased over the past 50 years(please reference the related charts for exact numbers). With industrial sized farms becoming moreprevalent not only has a cultural shift occurred, but the town’s natural resources may be affected.Larger farms tend to have intensified amounts of animal waste as well as concentrated usage offertilizers and pesticides. These practices have adverse affects not only on the streams and rivers withinthe Town but also on all existing environments down river. Survey numbers indicate an equally strongdesire to preserve our natural resources along with our family farms. With this in mind it is vital for theTown to create policy and programs that encourage sustainable farming practices, as defined by theobjectives, and to prevent and discourage other incompatible land uses that have a negative impact onthe natural resources so valued by the Town citizens.

Objectives

The Town should create and maintain agricultural opportunities through the preservation ofprime farmland.

The Town needs to separate agricultural land use from commercial development such ashousing and industrial.

The Town will create programs that support and encourage nontraditional farming practicessuch as, but not limited to, wind, switch grass, ag-tourism and orchards.

The Town will recognize and create policy to help maintain a healthy balance whereagricultural usage intersects with natural resources.

The Town will maintain existing programs that promote sound resource management practicessuch as Farmland Preservation, Management Forest Law and Conservation Reserve Program.

Existing Conditions

According to the USDA’s definition, Prime Farmland is land on which crops can be produced for theleast cost and with the least damage to the resource base. Land usage is determined by the physicalcharacteristics or topography of the land in question. Farming on land that does not fit the definition of‘prime farmland’ will clearly have a negative impact on natural resources which is contrary topreservation desires as indicated by the survey results. One example would be farming on highlyerodible land. A clear understanding of these characteristics is essential to creating policy and definingrelationships between agricultural uses, natural resource and cultural uses. Consideration of thepotential effects on these physical interrelationships will determine future development policies.

America’s prime farmland region coincides with our traditional ideas of America’s farm belt. Whilenot as productive agriculturally as other areas of the upper Midwest, Wisconsin has over 12 millionacres of prime farmland and is home to over 78 thousand farms.

Much of the land in Pepin County falls within these trends for land use as does the Town of Pepin.While the State, County and Town have always held onto these agricultural ideals the reality is that


during the past 20 years the trend has been towards development of agricultural land for non-agricultural uses as indicated below.

Data collected both Statewide and by County give some indication not only of the current usage butalso project some idea of future agricultural land use.

Agricultural Land Usage by Numbers in Pepin County

-Total Cropland 2007: 67,504 acres from 465 farms.-Harvested Cropland 2007: 59,783 acres from 342 farms.-Corn harvested 2007: 3,297,366 bushels from 24,375 acres.-Farms with one operator: 282.-Farms with two operators: 186.-Average age of farm operator in 2007: 54.6 yrs.

-From 1990 to 2002 Pepin County had converted over 25% of its farmland to non-farm land usage. This number falls just below the State’s 29% average.

-Pepin County sits well above the State for average amount of cropland.Pepin County Cropland in 2002: 41%State of Wisconsin average cropland: 25%

Pepin Township has experienced a drastic reduction in dairy farms. 1989 through 1997 saw a 41%drop in dairy farms. 1997 through 2002 saw another 35% drop in dairy farms.

Agricultural land sold for nonagricultural uses fetched a premium of up to 135% above the averagefarmland price during the mid 1990’s in Pepin Township.


Census figures from 2000 show 580 people living in Pepin Town and 143 living on farms.

As these statistics are reviewed the debate about the future trends in farming and agricultural land usein Pepin Township deserve to be seriously reviewed. With town survey results indicating over 90% ofrespondents in favor of protecting the family farm, both farm and land preservation efforts must beencouraged to prevent nonagricultural development from eliminating this highly valued culturalelement.

As people become more drawn to the idea of country living, unchecked development practices alongwith unsustainable farming practices (see “Existing Conditions”) may ultimately denigrate thecountryside that residents have indicated they want to see maintained and sustained.

Regulations, Programs and Agencies

Manure StorageAs farms have grown in herd size the practice of spreading manure directly on fields on a daily basishas changed to manure storage practices. Federal and state rules are in place to help with protection ofthe water and environment. Pepin County has supplemented these rules with a local manure storageordinance. The Pepin County Land Conservation Department offers assistance in following thetechnical standards developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources ConservationService (USDA- NRCS) which to ensure effective, practical and environmentally safe methods ofstoring and utilizing manure. The following information is found in the ordinance: “The purpose ofthis ordinance is to regulate the location, design, construction, installation, alteration, abandonment,and use of manure storage facilities, in order to prevent water pollution and thereby protect the healthof Pepin County residents and transients; prevent the spread of disease; and promote the prosperity andgeneral welfare of the citizens of Pepin County. It is also intended to provide for the administration andenforcement of the ordinance and to provide penalties for its violation.” The ordinance requires apermit for new construction or substantial alteration of a manure storage facility and for proper closureor restoration of an inactive facility. Screening and siting rules are part of the regulations.

Livestock Facility Siting LawOn May 1, 2006 the Livestock Facility Siting Law (s. 93.90 Wis. Stats.) became effective, creating apredictable framework for county and municipal decisions to site new or expanding livestock facilities.The Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) was charged withdeveloping and implementing the administrative rule (ATCP 51 Wis. Admin. Code) that sets thestandards local governments must use, as well as those that livestock operators must follow to receivea permit. Twenty towns and eighteen counties have enacted ordinances that balance local control,community oversight, environmental protection and the need for a predictable siting process.Conditional use permits issued under a zoning ordinance remain the most common type of localregulation. In areas not covered by zoning, six counties and four towns have adopted licensingordinances to implement the siting law. More information about this law can be found atlivestocksiting.wi.gov. Questions concerning the livestock siting law can be directed to MichaelMurray at 608-224-4613 or [email protected].

U.S. Department of Agriculture: www.usda.govThe Farm Service Agencies throughout the nation administer the government programs in support ofagriculture. The mission of the agency is to equitably serve all farmers, ranchers, and agriculturalpartners through the delivery of effective, efficient agricultural programs for all Americans. The

http://www.usda.gov/


following topics of information can be found on the site: Commodity Operations, ConservationPrograms, ACRE program, Disaster Assistance Programs, Economic and Policy Analysis, EnergyPrograms, Environmental and Cultural Resource Compliance, Farm Loan Programs, and Outreach andRegulations.

Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection:www.datcp.state.wi.us/core/agriculture/agriculture.jspThis site provides information under many topics to include Dairy Farming, Crops, Working LandsInitiative, Livestock, Conservation, Fertilizer, Aquaculture, and Apiary. The link to ‘The Farm Center’provides guides and a newsletter with many more articles of interest to farmers as well as members ofthe farming community.

University Extension: pepin.uwex.edu/ag/index.htmlMuch research in the areas of agriculture, community development, horticulture, family living, andnutrition continues in the colleges within the state. The Extension service brings this knowledge to theconsumer and farmers through the local Extension agents and staff located within county offices.The Pepin County agent is located at the County Government Center.

Pepin County Farm Service AgencyProvides information, assistance and forms related to current Federal agricultural and landconservation programs. The agency is located at the Pepin County Government Center.

Wisconsin Agricultural Tourism Association, Inc.: www. Visitdairyland.comWisconsin Agricultural Tourism Association promotes and preserves the rural lifestyle, fosterspartnership opportunities within the ag-tourism community, and provides tools which encouragesustainable economic growth while creating awareness of Wisconsin agriculture.

http://www.datcp.state.wi.us/core/agriculture/agriculture.jsp


Natural Resources

WATER RESOURCES

Pepin Township relies heavily on its water resources, both surface waters and grounds waters, for itsdrinking water, agri-business, tourism and recreation. Any factors that decrease the quality of theresource are a concern to all citizens of the township. Two of the most commonly used naturalresources in the township are surface water and groundwater. The Town of Pepin relies heavily onaquifers and groundwater for its water and they are the primary source of water for domestic wells.

Surface WaterThe Town of Pepin has two major bodies of water adjacent to it, the Mississippi River/Lake Pepin andthe Chippewa River. In addition, it has many other streams totally or partially within its borders. Theseare: Bogus Creek, Lost Creek, Roaring River, Sixteen Mile Creek, Elk Creek and Little Plum Creek.The runoffs from all of these are collected either in the Mississippi or Chippewa Rivers. Inlandnavigable waters are subject to at least two Federal laws or treaties. The Federal Water Pollution Actand Annex Five of the Marpol Treaty.

ShorelinesThe shorelines in the Town of Pepin consist of wetlands, forest land, recreation and residential areas.Pepin County has a shoreline ordinance protecting this land. State law allows shoreland ordinances tobe enforced in all townships without local adoption.

Wetlands and FloodplainsWetlands need protection as they provide habitat for wildlife, filter water, protect the shoreline,provide flood protection, allow flora and fauna species diversity and are an important area forrecharging groundwater. The Wisconsin Administrative Code in Chapter NR 115 recognizes theimportance of protecting wetlands in shoreline areas. Federally funded farm programs regulatewetlands that are not adjacent to navigable bodies of water. The Wisconsin Department of NaturalResources and the Army Corps of Engineers regulate development of other wetlands which can besmaller than 5 acres. Wetland Zoning regulations are enforced by Pepin County.

FloodplainsFloodplains are another source that needs protection because of the important functions that a properlymaintained floodplain can provide. Allowing development in floodplains is not advised as any propertyis likely to be subject to some form of adverse risk. Presently it is common not to allow any newdevelopment in floodplains. Often present development is moved out of the floodplain areas toalleviate local governments from financial, health and safety concerns surrounding the flooding ofproperty.

Groundwater and AquifersThe town residents rely entirely on groundwater for their potable water supply. This is importantbecause the type and intensity of development can have a negative impact on groundwater supply andquality. High volume wells can disrupt groundwater levels and water quality. Groundwater andaquifers can easily be contaminated through point source or non-point source pollution particularly inareas with thin soils over fractured limestone, sandstone and shale bedrock such as are commonlypresent in the township.


The Town of Pepin borders the Village of Pepin on the east, west and north sides. The primarygroundwater for the village flows through the township generally towards the Mississippi or ChippewaRivers. The township recognizes the village’s importance to the vitality, health and well being to it andrecognizes the importance to the village and the township of the implementation of the village’swellhead protection plan as prepared by the Village of Pepin Municipal Water Utility with theassistance of the Wisconsin Rural Water Association.

Water QualityWith the importance of surface and groundwater to the prosperity of the township the highestconsideration should be given to water quality. Careful considerations needs to be given to any permitsfor high flow wells, mining activities, landfills and development near wetlands, shorelines or alongstreams, and application of chemicals which will affect the quality of the water. Water Qualitystandards have been established by The Department of Natural Resources under Chapter NR 140.These standards have been set for substances found in ground water and/or substances that have a highlikelihood of getting into the groundwater.

Appendix II contains the following maps for additional information: Floodplain, SurfaceWaters/Wetlands, Groundwater Flow and Nitrates

MINING RESOURCES

Pepin County requires permits for non-metallic mines. Each site also is required to file a ReclamationPlan by state regulations. 5 of the 19 County Non-Metallic Mining sites are located in the Township:

NM #5 Johnson Quarry, Goatback Road The Kraemer Company LLC, Operator 7 acres-20 TotalNM #8 Tulip Quarry, Big Hill Road The Kraemer Company LLC, Operator 3 acres-43 TotalNM #13 Martin Quarry, Hogue Road Pepin Cty Hwy Department, Operator 2.5 ac.-25 TotalNM #16 Komisar Pit, Trail Road Andrew Komisar, Operator & Owner 5 acres-40 TotalNM #19 Seyffer Quarry, Bluff Road The Kraemer Company LLC, Operator 5 acres

WILDLIFE HABITAT

Introduction

Pepin Township is located in the driftless region characterized by highly eroded blufftops and deepvalleys or coulees. It is an ecological region of oak savannas, sand prairies, hardwood and floodplainforests and wetlands. Pepin township is on the Mississippi River, a major North American flyway forcountless songbirds, raptors and waterfowl including many endangered and threatened species such asthe peregrine falcon, yellow-crowned night heron, snowy egret, and red-shouldered hawk (for acomplete list and more information on state laws and guidelines, see attachment). The Tiffany WildlifeArea runs along the southeastern border of the township and includes Five-Mile Bluff Prairie and theLower Chippewa River State Wildlife Area. These natural areas contain and support a number ofuncommon and/or rare species. (For more information see the Wisconsin DNR Website).

Selected Township Survey Results

- 94% of respondents want to preserve the town’s scenic beauty.- 90% of respondents want to preserve flood plains, wildlife habitat and waterways.


- 88% of respondents think Pepin Township should make natural resources protectiona high priority.

Goals

- Develop long range plans to protect and preserve the scenic beauty, natural resources and wildlifehabitats of Pepin Township.

- Coordinate public and private efforts to protect prime agricultural land, woodlands, wetlands,floodplains, oak savanna, prairies, blufftops and the habitats of threatened and endangered speciesfrom environmentally insensitive or unsustainable land use practices in Pepin township.

Objectives

- Encourage and manage the natural resources of Pepin Township for long-term ecological andeconomic sustainability.

- Encourage the preservation and protection of endangered and threatened species and their habitats onpublic and private lands in Pepin Township.

- Promote environmentally sensitive and appropriate land uses that protect and preserve all of thenatural resources of Pepin Township.

Wildlife Habitat in Pepin Township

In 2005, as part of the Wildlife Action Plan (WAP), the Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources dividedthe state into sixteen “ecological landscapes” for the purpose of identifying native species and theirhabitats in greatest need of conservation. Pepin Township is in the northwestern corner of the WesternCoulee and Ridges region, an area that includes nineteen counties in west central and southwesternWisconsin. This region has the second highest percentage of farmland acreage in the state and of itsapprox. 6.2 million acres, only 3% is in public ownership.

Natural communities designated as in need of protection, restoration and preservation in this regioninclude; oak forests, oak savanna, hardwood and floodplain forests, sand and blufftop prairies. Ofparticular concern in Pepin Township are communities that were once historically common but arenow uncommon or rare such as blufftop prairies, (goat prairies), sand prairies, and oak savanna.

The purpose of the WAP is to manage natural resources for long-term ecological and economicsustainability by protecting and preserving species and their habitats. The Wisconsin DNR hasprovided a set of definitions and guidelines for achieving these objectives. An example of one suchdefinition is included below.

“Sustaining natural communities means ensuring that a given natural community type will be presentand has high potential to maintain its natural composition, structure, and ecological function over along period of time (e.g. 100 years). This goal of sustainability does not preclude a ‘workinglandscape’ where both traditional (e.g. forest and agricultural products) and non-traditional (e.g.ginseng, sphagnum moss, etc.) products are extracted from an area. Some community types may needrestoration because they have been greatly reduced in size or frequency of occurrence across part or all


of their state range. Restoration should include reestablishing species composition or vegetationstructure. It could also include restoring a missing, diminished or altered ecological process orinfluence such as fire or water flow.

People are dependent on natural resources, so to maintain economic sustainability over the long term,natural resources must be maintained. Such a philosophy allows for human use so long as the capacityof natural resources for self-renewal is not compromised. However, removing natural resources in anunsustainable way will not benefit natural communities, our economy or the human population in thelong term.”

An Example - Oak Savannas in Wisconsin (information taken from the WI DNR)

In the early to mid-19th century, the oak savanna ecosystem was thoroughly fragmented and nearlydestroyed throughout its range. Most of its acreage suffered from clearing, plowing, overgrazing,invasion by dense shrub and tree growth caused by lack of fire, lack of grazing or both. Consequently,oak savanna now shares equal billing with tall grass prairie as the most threatened plant communitiesin the Midwest and among the most threatened in the world. Only a little more than 500 acres of intactexamples of oak savanna vegetation are listed in the Wisconsin State Natural Heritage Inventory orless than 0.01% of the original 7.3 million acres.

Fortunately most of the biota that was associated with savanna, especially the vertebrates have eitheradapted to the changed landscape or have managed to survive in suboptimal habitat. This situation isprecarious for many species however and their long-term future is doubtful.

Oak savanna vegetation has not fared as well. Many species that were savanna specialists are nowuncommon and found only in the fringes and openings of oak woods, brushy areas and lightly grazedpastures. Recently a number of savanna birds have not thrived or have begun to decline throughouttheir range due to loss of habitat including the northern flicker, northern bobwhite, field sparrow,warbling vireo and orchard oriole - all species of special concern. The loggerhead shrike and barn owlare now on Wisconsin’s endangered species list.

In the absence of active management, the future of oak savanna looks bleak in Wisconsin andthroughout its entire range. The increasing abandonment of lightly to moderately grazed woodedpastures (due to agricultural production and other forms of development) and the acceleratingsuccession of oak woodlots toward heavy shade-producing trees and shrubs are likely to lead to thefurther decline and possible loss of much of the remaining savanna flora and fauna, including theeventual decline of the oaks themselves.

References- Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources publications - website: www.dnr.wi.gov.- National Heritage Inventory (NIH) statewide database & pre-settlement vegetation data.- Southern Forest, Savanna, and Grassland Ecosystem Research Project- The Nature Conservancy’s Eco-regional Planning Initiative.


Cultural Resources

ArchaeologyOur lives are influenced by what we learn from our own experiences and by the events that haveshaped the communities we live in and the institutions and organizations we encounter. Our historygives us a sense of place and a framework to understand the world. It provides continuity and meaningin our lives and it can be a basis for economic development through preservation programs andHeritage Tourism.

People have been living in the area for thousands of years, with hunting, fishing, farming, and forestryplaying a central role in their lives. This story of agriculture, resource use, and land stewardship ispreserved in archaeological sites, buildings, landscapes, written accounts, photographs, governmentalrecords, and the thoughts and ideas people remember and pass along by word of mouth. Planning canplay a critical part in protecting these resources and in learning from this wealth of experience. Land-use planning and land use decisions will directly impact historic buildings, archaeological sites, andcemeteries.

The unique geography and environment of Pepin Township, its long inhabitation by diverse groups ofpeople, and strong ongoing traditions make it a place of rich cultural resources. The StateArcheological Survey identifies thirty-two sites (mounds, burials, earthworks and enclosures, locationsof campsites/villages, and early farmsteads) within the Township, from Middle and Late Woodland,Oneota, Middle and Late Mississipian, Historic Indian, and historic Euro-American time periods. It islikely that additional, not yet identified archaeological sites exist within the Township.

(A list of the sites is available from the Office of the State Archaeologist – though in the interest ofpreserving archeological sites from damage, this information is not subject to public disclosure).

Audubon Great River Birding TrailPepin Township borders portions of the Tiffany Bottoms State Natural Area, the largest and mostimportant intact floodplain forest in Wisconsin. The Bottoms attract nearly every species of bird foundin Wisconsin, and is home to nesting woodland warblers, flycatchers and woodpeckers of all kinds.Interior swamps produce night herons, bitterns and egrets. Tiffany Bottoms is owned by the DNR andwas designated a State Natural Area in 1958.

ArchitectureThe State Architecture and History Inventory (AHI), produced by the Wisconsin Historical SocietyDivision of Historic Preservation, conducted an inventory of architecturally unique and/or significantstructures within Pepin Township in 1982-83. Of the eighteen structures identified in the 1982-83inventory, five have been demolished, including one of three round barns in the Township. The localstructures in the inventory, some of which are not gone can be found in Appendix III.

ChurchesWithin the Township there are 4 churches:Lund Mission Covenant Church, W10899 County Road CCSabylund Lutheran, W1103 County Road JPepin Hill Evangelical Free Church, County Road NCalvary Apostolic Lighthouse UPC, N807 Sand Burr Road


CemeteriesMission Covenant CemeteryNew Sabylund CemeteryOakwood Cemetery

Programs/ResourcesA variety of State programs related to the preservation and development of local cultural resources areavailable to Township residents, including:

Wisconsin Historic Preservation Fund Subgrants: Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) subgrants areadministered by the Wisconsin Historical Society’s Division of Historic Preservation (DHP). Ownersof historic income-producing properties in Wisconsin may be eligible for two (2) income tax creditsthat can help pay for their building’s rehabilitation. The Wisconsin Historical Society’s Division ofHistoric Preservation (DHP) administers the programs in conjunction with the National Park Service(NPS). The programs are:

Federal Historic Preservation Credit: This program returns 20 percent of the cost of rehabilitatinghistoric buildings to owners as a direct reduction in their federal income taxes.

Wisconsin Supplemental Historic Preservation Credit: This program returns an additional five (5)percent of the cost of rehabilitation to owners as a discount on their Wisconsin state income taxes.Owners that qualify for the Federal Historic Preservation Credit automatically qualify for theWisconsin supplement if they get NPS approval before they begin any work.

Historic Home Owner’s Tax Credits: The Wisconsin Historical Society’s Division of HistoricPreservation (DHP) administers a program of 25-percent state income tax credits for repair andrehabilitation of historic homes in Wisconsin. Applicants must meet stated qualifications and eligiblework requirements.

Archaeological Sites Property Tax Exemption Program: Wis. Stats. 70.11(13m) provides a propertytax exemption for owners of archaeological sites listed in the National Register of Historic Places orthe State Register of Historic Places. The intent of the legislation is to provide an incentive forlandowners to protect significant archaeological sites on their lands. To obtain the tax exemption, thelandowner must agree to place a permanent protective covenant on the site. The protective covenantencourages land use planning to avoid disturbing the site area. The covenant contains a legaldescription of the area that is to be exempted from property taxes and defines landowner andWisconsin Historical Society obligations in the protection of that area.


Intergovernmental Cooperation

Intergovernmental cooperation is a critical component of this planning effort and future well-being ofthe Town of Pepin. Local services and planning strategies can be strengthened by cooperation withneighborhood communities. Most arrangements involve only two governmental units, but there arealso agreements among multiple units. Intergovernmental cooperation may range from formal jointpower agreements to unwritten understanding. This is an overview of the Town’s intergovernmentalrelationships with local villages, towns, county, school districts, State of Wisconsin, and importantfederal agencies that maintain presence in the area.

Goals

Foster cooperation policies and programs, capitalizing on the economics of scale of serviceprovision and developing growth management approaches that improve the currentgovernmental relationships.

Encourage the coordination and cooperation among the Towns, Villages, Pepin County, SchoolDistricts, and the State to ensure community and consistency in current and future planningefforts.

Communicate with the Town’s neighbors to explore and establish shared interests and goals forland use, conservation, and development.

Objectives

Continue to keep communication open with the Town’s neighbors.

Continue to foster intercommunity ambulance, library support, fire and law enforcementservices.

Maintain and improve rural character that is compatible with our neighboring communities.

Recommendations

Continue to work with Pepin County, Village of Pepin, and other municipalities to identifyjoint services and facilities where consolidating, coordinating, or sharing services or facilitieswill result in better services and/or cost savings.

Maintain open relationships with neighboring jurisdictions to build trust among staff andelected and appointed officials, to share information, to cooperate on issues of mutual interestor concern, and to identify and resolve potential conflicts at an early stage.

Existing Relationships

Within the County of Pepin, the Town of Pepin shares services with the Village of Pepin and Villageof Stockholm. In addition to services, boundaries are shared with Town of Frankfort, Town ofStockholm and Town of Maiden Rock in Pierce County-the northern border. Some of ourrelationships are similar while others are unique-adapting to the specific need.


Town of Stockholm: Participation in joint Lund Volunteer Fire Department Section of Cottonwood Lane extends beyond boundary Share District 12 County Supervisor Joint ratification of Mississippi River Bluffland Zoning Ordinance in 1993

Town of Maiden Rock: Participation in joint Lund Volunteer Fire Department Road agreement for section of town road extending in/out of boundaries

Town of Frankfurt: Share District 12 County Supervisor

Village of Stockholm: Share District 12 County Supervisor Participation in joint Lund Volunteer Fire Department

Village of Pepin: Share 50/50 cost of Pepin Ambulance Service Village Fire Department has mutual response agreement with Lund Police Department provides back up to Pepin County Sheriff services Share District 10 County Supervisor Agreement with Clerk to provide State Election Registration Pepin Public Library provides service to residents Share County Sanitation site located in Town-cost sharing rent and Trail Road maintenance Annexation part of Sandridge Road/Third St resulted in agreement of maintenance for State

Highway Aide Maintains a natural water reservoir in Town-main pipeline on Sandridge Road, which services

two Town residences at boundary Implementation of a Well-Head Protection Plan

Pepin CountyThe Town of Pepin is located in Pepin County. Currently, the County has not adopted acomprehensive plan. The Town of Pepin uses the resources of the County for many purposes,mainly the County General Code Ordinance No. 179. The Town of Pepin is subject to allordinances, however, we list those that are most applicable.

Social Services Courts, Jail and District Attorney Sheriff Office Health Department and Nursing Service Solid Waste/Recycling-maintaining site in the Town Building and Zoning permits-including floodplain, shoreline, bluffland and sanitary

facilities Non-metallic Mining Reclamation County Roads-N, I, CC and at the NW Boundary J and SS Highway Department


o Contract with the Town for all road maintenanceo Rents the Town Garage facility

Regional GovernmentThe Mississippi River Regional Planning Commission (MRRPC), organized in 1964, includesthe Town of Pepin in their jurisdiction. They prepare and adopt regional or county-wide plansand represents Pierce, Pepin, Buffalo, Trempeleau, La Crosse, Vernon, Crawford, Jackson andMonroe counties. They were established to: Carry out comprehensive and intergovernmental planning Have jurisdiction though-out the area Meet area-wide requirements for local grant aide Provide an organization to receive federal grants

State and Federal Agency JurisdictionsThere are many state and federal agencies that affect planning in Pepin County. The WisconsinDepartment of Transportation (DOT), plays a critical role in many aspects of the county’stransportation system, from highway design and development, to bicycle and pedestrianfacilities and networks. Today the only state road remaining in the Town of Pepin is Highway35. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) also has a prominent role in theCounty, as well as the Town. Many DNR-owned land and facilities are located there. TheUniversity Extension office is located in the city of Durand and serves as an educationalresource for County residents. The U.S. Department of Agriculture maintains offices there too,for establishing farm plans, crop reporting, and land conservation. The U.S. Fish & WildlifeService maintains a presence in the County because of the Upper Mississippi National Wildlifeand Fish Refuge.

School DistrictsPepin Area Schools is comprised of all the municipalities within our boundaries. Located inthe Village of Pepin, grades pre-K through 12th grade, they currently share personnel at theacademic level and sport venues. The Town of Pepin continues to have an informal andengaged relationship with the district.

Chippewa Valley Technical College is a partner in economic development throughout ourregion. The curriculum is designed to meet employment needs of our businesses andindustries. The Town of Pepin is a member of the district. The facility in Eau Claire,Wisconsin maintains three campuses—Clairemont, West and Gateway.

Existing or Potential Conflicts and Resolution

The 1993 Mississippi River Bluffland Zoning Ordinance was adopted jointly with the Town ofStockholm. To resolve concerns voiced, the ordinance could be revisited and revised.

The Seifert Addition residents considered annexation to the Village of Pepin a few years ago.Clean drinking water and sewage control were issues of concern at that time. The Town ofPepin will remain open to communication with the Village of Pepin regarding future citizenconcerns if problems develop in the future.


Economic Development

The American Economic Development Council provides a definition for economic development as,“the process of creating wealth through the mobilization of human, financial, capital, physical andnatural resources to generate marketable goods and services.” Today this endeavor must be pursuedcarefully to protect resources and the livability of a community. Sustainability and stewardship arenew concepts which most citizens support and desire when encouraging individuals, families andcompanies to maintain or grow their businesses.

Goals

Maintain the rural character of the Town of Pepin in development of new business and the growth andretention of existing businesses.

Encourage industrial and commercial business growth in selected areas to minimize impact onagricultural land.

Protect natural resources and minimize negative impacts on the natural beauty of the Lake Pepin areaand the bluffs in new developments for business, recreation and housing.

Create a productive community which will attract families to the area to support the existence of thelocal school in the Village of Pepin.

Objectives

Attract and retain businesses that enhance the livability of the area and protect our natural resources.

Encourage and support rural business growth in the areas of home businesses and agriculturalcommodities.

Cooperate with the Village of Pepin to support business development to be concentrated along theHighway 35 corridor and in the Village of Pepin Industrial Park.

Obtain more support in economic growth activities for both the Town of Pepin and Pepin County fromtax supported agencies designed to assist local communities in development.

Provide information for our citizens about the numerous business development organizations available.


Many citizens of the Town of Pepin enjoy living in the area. The survey data resulted in 82% of therespondents agreeing that the ‘Overall Quality of Life’ is Excellent or Good, 12% stating it was Fairand only 3% marked the Poor rating. The future expectation of ‘Quality of Life’ ratings are asfollows: Improve-20%, Stay the Same-52%, and Worsen-24%.

Survey respondents are agreeable to some forms of development, but are also open to planning andhaving some restrictions on where and how growth should occur. 60% of respondents Strongly Agreeor Agree to ‘Allow new growth only in and near cities, villages’. 76% Strongly Agree or Agree that


‘Commercial projects should be encouraged’. 69% Strongly Agree or Agree that ‘Industrial projectsshould be encouraged’. The survey respondents Strongly Agree or Agree that it is a good idea to‘Promote more small non-farm businesses’ for this rating was 81%. Any new growth must be plannedand developed carefully for this community for survey data shows a rating of 88% from respondentsStrongly Agreeing and Agreeing to the statement: “Make natural resource protection a high priority’.

Land used for ‘Family farms’ are Strongly Supported by 81% of the survey respondents. The citizenshave some concerns about air and water pollution coming from agricultural practices. Commentsinclude concerns about nitrogen levels in well water and even atrazine was found in testing for tworespondents. 61% Strongly Oppose or Oppose Somewhat ‘Large scale commercial farms’. Thestatement ‘Farm operations should not be restricted by government regulations’ had mixed responsesas follows: Strongly Agree-10%, Agree-27%, Disagree-37%, Strongly Disagree-18%.

Many respondents believe the rural nature of the community and small town atmosphere needs to bemaintained and is very important to the citizens living here. Any growth and development needs to fitproperly into this rural and ‘country’ character of the land and community. There is a great concernindicated by many comments about the high level of property taxes and the future of families beingable to stay in the area and moving into the community. There are certainly differing opinions abouttaxes in the community as indicated by the response to the statement: ‘Lower property taxes even ifthis means a reduction in the current level of service’. Although 60% Strongly Agree or Agree withthis, 30% of respondents Disagree. (The statement itself was commented about by some and many questioned what

services are of issue here.) This dilemma presents difficult growth and improvement problems foreveryone living here. Survey respondents Strongly Agree (45%) and Agree (40%) with the statement:‘Require developers to pay for the added costs of providing local services that are needed to serve theirprojects.’

Existing Businesses

Dairy farming, livestock farming and production of grains and alfalfa are major enterprises for farmersowning many acres of productive land. Retired farmers staying on farm homesteads often rent outland for crops to neighboring dairy farmers or crop farmers. The Town of Pepin has a variety of smallbusinesses serving the community and a growing number of home based businesses. Most of the smallbusinesses are located near the Village of Pepin. The following table lists known current businesses inthe community.

McIntosh Motorsports Service & Recreation Linda’s Cut & CurlPepin Sportsman’s Club Lynn’s BarbershopDr. Lee Vineyard Bernie Finch, D. C.Shear Satisfaction C & A AutoThe Enchanted Hat Pepin Self StorageWisconsin Unclaimed Freight Little House StoreStockholm Pottery Cindy Baader Antique ShopRiver City Welding Emily Post Day CareMyklebust+Sears Studio NockpointTim Fetzer Construction Pepin AutoAlan Brantner Taxidermy Jim Sterry Landscaping & SnowplowingCedar Hill Guest House & Wellness Spa Auth Electric & Refrigeration LLP


King Services Damon & Melanie York Horse Training & BoardingSandy Dykema Massage This Old BikeRichard Knopf Horse Boarding Wilbur Orne Cattle DehorningTiffany Lake Pepin Cycle Bennett’s GardenMidwest Art Fairs Zahn Piano TuningDerrick Dahlen Vineyard(The above list may not be completely up-to-date. Additional home-based and/or internet businesses may exist in thecommunity.)

Labor Force

Commuting DataOut-Commuting to Other Counties (2000 Census)Pepin County 1900 53.8%Commuting To: Count PercentageEau Claire 401 11.4Dunn County 287 8.1Pierce County 216 6.1Buffalo County 195 5.5Goodhue County 180 5.1Wabasha County MN 149 4.2St. Croix County 43 1.2Chippewa County 21 0.6Trempealeau County 18 0.5Dakota County MN 16 0.5Olmsted County MN 16 0.5All Other 89 2.5

In-Commuting (2000 Census)Pepin County 1900 73%Commuting From: Count PercentageBuffalo County 308 11.8Dunn County 144 5.5Pierce County 118 4.5Eau Claire County 62 2.4Monroe County 12 0.5Trempealeau County 11 0.4Chippewa County 10 0.4Wabasha County MN 7 0.3Rusk County 6 0.2St. Croix County 6 0.7All Other 18 0.7

Educational Attainment--Town of Pepin--2000 Census Data

Population 25 years and over 391 100%Less than 9th grade 17 4.3


9th to 12th grade, no diploma 33 8.4High School graduate or GED 166 42.5Some college, no degree 78 19.9Associate degree 26 6.6Bachelor’s degree 39 10.0Graduate of professional degree 32 8.2Percent high school grad or higher 87.2 %Percent bachelor’s degree or higher 18.2 %

StrengthsElectrical grid available and adequate for present needsAdequate phone facilities availableStrong Visitor (Tourism) environmentStrong recreational features and natural resources for hunting and fishingGood transportation via State Highway 35Good County road systemRural road system adequate for transportation of agricultural productsModerate-sized cities within reasonable travel distanceColleges, Universities and Technical Schools within reasonable travel distanceRural communities provide individuals with good work ethic

WeaknessesNo Natural Gas availabilityNo railroad spur available in PepinNo water transportation facilitiesInterstate Highway Access greater than 30 minute driveNo local airport accessReasonably priced high-speed Internet access not available

Environmentally Contaminated SitesThere are no known brownfield sites in the township.

Future Concerns and ConsiderationsLack of job opportunities in and near the Town of Pepin requires many to commute long distances towork. This concern has an impact on larger communities also as suggested in the White Paper, Drivento the Brink, How the Gas Price Spike Popped the Housing Bubble and Devalued the Suburbs, by JoeCortright, May 2008, UW-Extension. He reports, “When gas prices again exceed $3/gallon, a majorblow will be dealt to consumer purchasing power. Living in rural areas will become more difficult whengas prices increase to levels at or above peak levels reached in 2008. Long-distance commuters willsee the greatest impact on family budgets. Public transportation for workers in rural communities isnot available now and will unlikely be available in the future.” Transportation issues are beingdiscussed in the state and state planners are aware of the problems. The state budget deficit will limitany assistance in this area.

An aging population and fewer families living and moving into the township place a serious financialburden onto the school. New business needs to be encouraged and supported in the Village of Pepinand in the Town of Pepin. The community needs more jobs and must become more involved indecisions about new business development for the area.


Economic Development Resources (Internet links were valid as of June 12, 2009.)

Pepin County Economic Development OfficeTerry Mesch, Executive DirectorP.O. Box 39, Durand, WI 54736, Phone: 715-672-5709

Mississippi River Regional Planning CommissionMMRPC represents nine counties near the Mississippi River in West Central Wisconsin. It providesadministrative and technical assistance to the community. Financial assistance is available throughrevolving loan funds (RLF). Pepin County is also eligible for assistance through the Business CapitalFund (BCF). This fund targets selected service industries, manufacturers, and tourism for creatingjobs. Their website is located at www.mrrpc.com.

University of Wisconsin Extension ServicesEach county in Wisconsin supports an office for Cooperative Extension. Extension staff developseducational programs tailored to the local needs and are based on university knowledge and research.The local office is located at the Pepin County Government Center in Durand. Bob Cropp is the localdirector. The phone number is 715-672-5214.

Pierce-Pepin Electric CooperativeThe following information is found on the website at www.piercepepin.com. No specific informationis provided for economic development assistance. “PPCS is committed to the communities we serve.We support local schools, community organizations and agencies through donations and programs thatPPCS offers. PPCS also promotes economic development with financial assistance through variousprograms available to the cooperative. Many of our employees are personally involved with localgroups and organizations, which strengthens and enhances the cooperative’s relationship with thepeople and communities we serve.”

Rural DevelopmentU.S. Department of Agriculture-Rural Development: www.rurdev.usda.gov/wiWisconsin Rural Partners, Inc.: www.wirural.org

Business Planning AssistanceU.S. Small Business Administration: www.sba.govService Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE): www.score.orgOnline Women’s Business Center: www.onlinewbc.orgNational Center for Entrepreneurship: www.ncoe.orgWisconsin Dept. of Commerce: www.commerce.wi.state.usWisconsin Innovation Service Center (WISC): www.uww.edu/businessVirtual Business Incubator: www.virtualincubate.comBuild Your Business: www.wisconsin.gov/state/byb/financeWisconsin Manufacturing Extension Partnership: www.wmep.orgWisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce (WMC): www.wmc.orgWisconsin Business Resource Network: helpbusiness-wi.comWisconsin Women’s Business Initiative Corporation (WWBIC): www.wwbic.comNational Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), Wisconsin Chapter: www.nfib.comUW-Small Business Development Centers: www.uwex.edu/sbdcWisconsin Technical Colleges: www.tech.state.wi.us

http://www.mrrpc.com/

http://www.piercepepin.com/

http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/wi

http://www.wirural.org/

http://www.sba.gov/

http://www.score.org/

http://www.onlinewbc.org/


Business FinancingWisconsin Dept of Commerce: www.commerce.state.wi.usWI Dept. of Financial Institutions, 345 W Washington Avenue, Madison, WI 53703: www.wdfi.org

Provides information and resources that promote capital formation in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority (WHEDA): www.wheda.comWisconsin Bankers Association, Economic Development Resources: www.wisbank.com/edr/index.htmCommunity Development Block Grant Revolving Loan Funds: www.commerce.state.wi.us/MT/MTFAX-0963.htm

Wisconsin Business Development Finance Corporation (WBD): www.wbd.org

Technology Business ResourcesUW-Madison Office of Corporate Relations: www.corprelations.wisc.eduOffice of Tech Transfer, UW-Milwaukee, School of Business Administration,P.O. Box 742, Milwaukee, WI 53201: www.cti.sba.uwm.edu/index.htmlWisconsin Technology Council: www.wistec.com

Technology IncubatorsNorthwest Wisconsin Manufacturing, Outreach Center:: nwmoc.uwstout.edu

WorkforceWisconsin Department of Workforce Development www.dwd.state.wi.usWisconsin Department of Commerce (Customized Labor Training Grants and Business Employees’

Skills Training (BEST) Program): www.commerce.state.wi.usWisconsin JobNet: www.dwd.state.wi.us/jobnetWisconsin Job Exchange: www.wisconsinjobexchange.com (under construction)

http://www.wbd.org/


Land UseIntroduction

This element of the comprehensive plan draws from the information contained in the other elements tolook at existing conditions, make some predictions about the need for and use of land in the future andrecommend what actions should be considered by the community to protect resources and plan formanaged land use. A primary question behind this planning is ‘How do we balance among variousland use needs—farmland, natural resources, residential and other uses?’

The Plan Committee has used the survey results and reviewed the extensive comments provided byresidents and landowners to develop this element of the plan. This community views the ruralcharacter of the Town of Pepin as the most important aspect of living and owning property in the area.This community also has a high regard for family farms and agricultural pursuits. The natural beautyof the area needs protection and there is a great concern for maintaining clean water, protecting thenatural and cultural resources of the area and providing the environment which sustains our variedwildlife. These desires need to be in balance with the protection of the rights of land owners. Ourcommunity understands that growth will be hampered by current economic conditions and the future isdifficult to predict.


88% of survey respondents support the use of land for hobby farms and 97% for family farms.34% of respondents support the use of land for large scale commercial farms. 61% oppose this type ofland use.92% of respondents agree that the town should encourage agricultural land preservation.76% of respondents think the town should work to preserve farmland by limiting development.

94% of respondents agree that the town should preserve our township's scenic beauty.90% of respondents agree that the town should preserve flood plains, wildlife habitat and waterways.88% of respondents agree that the town should make natural resource protection a high priority.

81% of respondents agree that the town should develop long range plans to control development.85% of respondents agree that the town should require developers to pay for the added costs ofproviding local services that are needed to serve their projects.

36% Strongly Support and 35% Support Somewhat Use of Land for Recreation, non-motorized11% Strongly Support and 23% Support Somewhat Use of Land for Recreation, motorized12% Oppose Somewhat and 8% Strongly Oppose Use of Land for Recreation, non-motorized31% Oppose Somewhat and 30% Strongly Oppose Use of Land for Recreation, motorized(non-motorized, e.g. parks, golf courses; motorized, e.g. go-carts, motocross)

Vision

The Town of Pepin is an area of great scenic beauty bordering Lake Pepin and the Chippewa River. Itis also a region of dairy farms and country homes, blufflands and valleys filled with fields ofagricultural crops, forests, creeks, streams and natural springs. This community wishes to maintain therural and agricultural character of the area and protect the natural resources of forests, water andwildlife. We support residences, businesses and developments which enhance our great natural gifts


and provide protection for them. We know land ownership and living in a peaceful, rural communityrequires a balance of respecting individual rights with the responsibility of ensuring a safe, enjoyable,productive area for families, visitors and the generations to follow.

General Land Use Information, Statistics and Maps

The Town of Pepin does not currently use standard zoned areas or districts to control use of all of theland. Agriculture is the primary use of the land and the homes are on parcels with private sewersystems and private wells. A Bluffland Ordinance restricts development in areas near Lake Pepin. Seethe Bluffland Map in the Appendix. A Floodplain area also exists. A map of this area is in theAppendix. The Land Use map found in the Appendix is based on the current property tax recordsshowing only the use for the largest area within each land section. The following table provides asummary of acreage in the Town of Pepin according to the land use categories used in propertytaxation as provided by the County Treasurer:

Land Use Type Acreage Percent of TotalG4-Agricultural 12,689.07 43.6%G1-Residential 621.29 2.1G2-Commercial 67.81 0.23G3-Manufacturing 14.73G6-Productive Forest Lands 3,600.58 12.4G7-Other 220.45 0.75

Agricultural Forest 3,067.35 10.5W1-Private Forest Crop Pre 1972 82.63 0.28W6-Managed Forest(Closed)Post 2004 1,194.61 4.1W7-Managed Forest(Open) Pre 2005 755.0 2.6W8-Managed Forest(Closed) Pre 2005 3,437.88 11.8X2-State (DNR+Road, etc.) 1,839.73 6.3X3-County 5.97X4-Other 106.03 0.36Undeveloped (Idle, Rt of Way, etc) 1,413.28 4.8Total Acres on County records 29,116.41

The Town of Pepin is an area of many bluffs, rivers, streams and creeks. Geologically there are manyacres of land with high slopes. This limits good crop land as well as limits ideal sites for any form ofbuilding construction. The Appendix also contains a map showing the areas of steep slope.

Goals and Objectives

Goal: Protect the Rural Character of the Town of Pepin

ObjectivesSupport land use which preserves open spacesExplore and implement measures to ensure the pace and location of new residential

development does not have a negative impact on the rural character of the community


Support small and home-based business development in the community that complements ruralliving

Goal: Preserve Productive Farmland for Continued Agricultural Use

ObjectivesDevelop a plan to define the agricultural land according to the Land Evaluation (LE) portion of

the USCA-NRCS Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Program (LES)Develop plans for land division after important agricultural land is identified and mappedConsider developing plans and approval processes for new residences designed to protect

important farmlandWork with Pepin County programs to achieve NR151 and ATCP50 performance standards in

agricultural practices

Goal: Preserve the Scenic Beauty of the area and protect the land, waterways and groundwater

ObjectivesDiscourage agricultural and business activities that may pollute, change or otherwise harm our

creeks, streams and riversPreserve the Chippewa River and Lake Pepin for its recreational value

General Land Regulation by Government LevelsWisconsin Statute §236.45 authorizes the County Board to prohibit division of lands where suchprohibition will carry out the purposes set forth in §18.01(2). Pepin County has a number ofregulations and provides information explaining why land use and control of subdivision is importantto the citizens. The following is found in the ordinance:“The purpose of these regulations is to promote public health, safety and general welfare; to encouragethe most appropriate use of the land; to provide the best possible environment for human habitationand to conserve the value of buildings placed upon the land by:

(a) Lessening congestion in the streets or highways.(b) Furthering the orderly layout and use of land.(c) Securing safety from fire, panic and other dangers.(d) Providing adequate light and air.(e) Avoiding undue concentration of population.(f) Facilitating adequate provisions for transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks,playgrounds and other public requirements.(g) Facilitating, where appropriate, further resubdivision of larger tracts into smaller parcels.”

Land regulation ensures planned land use is suitable for the characteristics of the land parcel involvedin any new development or subdivision. In the County ordinance, General Suitability Standards aredescribed as follows:

No land shall be subdivided which is held unsuitable for its proposed use by the (Pepin CountyLand Management) Committee. Unsuitability can be flooding, inadequate drainage, adversesoil or rock formation, severe erosion potential, unfavorable topography, inadequate watersupply or sewage disposal capabilities or any other feature or circumstance likely to result inthe imposition of unreasonable costs to remedy severe and avoidable problems or to be harmful


to the health, safety or general welfare of the future residents of the subdivisions or of theCounty.

The Town of Pepin does not currently have congestion concerns on town roads. There are no schoolsor public playgrounds. Homes have private wells and private sewer systems and some areas of theTownship are not well suited for current sewer system designs. Lot size needs to be adequate to ensurewells are safe from sewage contamination. Adequate separation of homes is necessary to ensure safewater supplies for residents and the distance needed can vary throughout the Township. Soil drainagecapabilities vary throughout the area. The County and State requirements for issuing building permitshave prevented problems for newer structures. Older building patterns found in the Seifert Addition(Pugville) and Deer Island (Klampe Addition) have brought about concerns and some problems whichmust be avoided in future land use and subdivision. Building homes in areas of steep hillsides awayfrom public roads can create access problems for emergency equipment.

Current Subdivision and Building RequirementsDivision of a lot, parcel or tract of land by the land owner for transfer of ownership or buildingdevelopment currently requires either county approval or county and state approval in certainsituations. Subdivision creating small parcels of the equivalent of or less than ½ of a 40 acre section(20 acres) must be recorded as a Certified Survey Map and be approved by the county. Parcels largerthan 20 acres do not need an approval. Subdivisions of five or more lots, less than 1 ½ acres, createdby one division or by successive divisions within a 5 year period require county and state approval.These guidelines are found on the internet at www.co.pepin.wi.us/landmanage/Guidelines.doc.

Current Land Management OrdinancesIn Pepin County a Shoreland Ordinance restricts building within 1000 feet of a lake or 300 feet of ariver or stream. The Town of Pepin has adopted the Pepin County Land Use Ordinance requiring apermit to build be obtained from the County Zoning Office. The Sanitary Code and the Shoreland-Wetland Code are mandated by the State of Wisconsin. Floodplain restrictions are directed by bothState law and Federal law. Nonmetallic Mining Reclamation Code is state mandated. Pepin Countyordinances contain rules for a Certified Survey, Subdivision and Platting, Highway Setbacks,Telecommunications Tower Antennas and Driveway Access. The Town of Pepin has also adopted theDriveway Ordinance developed by Pepin County. The Shoreland-Wetland Zoning Ordinance andFloodplain regulations developed by Pepin County apply to all townships within the county and do notrequire local adoption for enforcement. The County Bluffland Ordinance is the newest landmanagement tool approved for the Towns of Pepin and Stockholm.

Mississippi River Bluffland Zoning OrdinanceIn the Statement of Purpose the following information defines the intent of this regulation:(a) Further the maintenance of safe and healthful conditions; prevent groundwater contamination andsoil erosion by:

1. Limiting structures to those areas where soil and geological conditions will provide a safefoundation.2. Establishing minimum lot sizes to provide adequate area for private sewage systems.3. Control filling and grading to prevent serious soil erosion problems.

(b) Control building sites, placement of structures and land uses by:1. Separating conflicting land uses.2. Setting minimum lot sizes and widths.3. Establishing setback requirements for building sites.

http://www.co.pepin.wi.us/landmanage/Guidelines.doc


(c) Protect unique wildlife habitat and natural aesthetics of the bluff area by:1. Restricting the removal of woody vegetation.2. Controlling excavation and other earth moving activities.3. Limiting building and development encroachment upon blufflines.

This regulation lists what land sections are included in the restricted area. Bluff characteristics aredefined so landowners can determine where development can be planned near the blufflines. The viewof structures from the Lake Pepin side of bluffs is a primary consideration in the development of therules for this area of the Township, so the natural beauty of the area can be maintained and protected.

Recent Permit Data5 permits for Single Family Dwellings were issued for 2008 and 1 permit was issued for DwellingAlteration or Addition. 8 permits for Single Family Dwellings were issued in 2007 with 4 permitsissued for Dwelling Alteration or Addition. In 2006 the number was 4 permits for a new residence and1 for Alteration or Addition.In 2008, 7 Nonresidential building permits were issued. In 2007, 14 Nonresidential building permitswere issued and 10 were issued the previous year. In 2008, 5 permits were issued for building,riprapping, fill or other construction in Floodplain/Shoreland areas and none were issued in 2007. 6permits were issued in this category for 2006.

Future Land Use ProjectionsNo projections have been made for land use in Town of Pepin. Very little change is expected in use ofland for Residential, Agricultural and Commercial. There is no land use categorized as Industrial inthe Town of Pepin.

Future Land and Property ValuesLand prices and home values have been increasing for many years. The cost of land has become veryunpredictable and land price varies greatly throughout the Town of Pepin. There is no data available topredict future land cost and the market value of homes in the region. Economic conditions wouldindicate that the cost of land may not continue to increase at the rate of the previous 10 years. Currentprices and high property taxes limit purchases by many area residents and especially families. Manyland purchases have been made by non-residents for recreational and hunting use and for secondhomes. The continuation of this type of land purchase can not be predicted. The region offers manydesirable features for land and home ownership and is located within reasonable travel distance fromthe Minneapolis-St. Paul and Rochester, Minnesota areas, where high paying jobs are still available. Ifland purchase of the future is only for second homes and recreational uses, the community may changein many ways. The change may be acceptable to the new land owners, but current residents haveconcerns about the possible loss of the rural and agricultural character of the Town of Pepin.

Natural Limitations for Building Site DevelopmentEnvironmentally sensitive areas such as flood plains, wetlands and steep slopes (FWSS areas) presentnatural limitations to building site construction and development (including but not limited to drivewayand road construction). Development on slopes 20% or greater should be highly discouraged to preventsevere erosion which has a negative impact on surface and ground water quality. Development alongstreams and rivers should also be regulated to prevent erosion and protect water quality. As statedunder "Current Land Management Ordinances", Pepin County has adopted a Shoreland-WetlandZoning Ordinance and this regulation applies to all townships in the county. The Town of Pepin hasadopted the Mississippi River Bluffland Zoning Ordinance. Both ordinances address the issue of


preserving and protecting FWSS areas within the township although development on steeply slopedland outside the jurisdiction of the bluffland zoning ordinance remains unregulated.

Recommendations for Future Land UseThe Plan Committee urges the Town of Pepin to appoint a committee to continue the study of the landuse issue. A detailed land use map needs to be developed to determine where the critical farm land islocated. The slope map needs to be used as an overlay to make this determination for agricultural landincludes fields laid out in strips used as contours for erosion control in high slope hillsides. As 2010Census data is analyzed and trends are developed this up-to-date growth information needs to bestudied along with economic data and household income data to determine whether there is a need todevelop regulations to control loss of agricultural land in the Town of Pepin. Many agencies and PepinCounty can assist in this process.

Programs, Plans, Agencies

Pepin County ProgramsPepin County has consolidated offices for many functions related to land management. Land use andzoning functions are part of the Land Management/Records, Emergency Government andEnvironmental Health Office. Pepin County also has a Land Conservation Department and aRecycling/Solid Waste Office. County Surveyor, County Conservationist and a Forester are appointedcounty positions. The University of Wisconsin Extension Agent works as the Agricultural Agent insupport of farm programs and other state supported activities and services available to countyresidents.

In 2003, the Pepin County Land Conservation Department working with representatives from the USDepartment of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), USDA FarmService Agency, University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension, Pepin County Zoning & EmergencyGovernment, Pepin County Recycling, Solid Waste & Economic Development, Farm Services Agencyand local farmers and residents, developed a Land Management and Water Resource Plan. This planwas developed for the years 2004-2008. The local advisory group identified the three most importantresource issues facing the county as:

Excessive soil erosion from cropland with corn and soybean rotationsGroundwater and surface water qualityLand use issues pertaining to agriculture and rural residential conflicts

A local survey used for plan development asked residents what services the conservation departmentshould focus on in the near future. Three items were listed as follows:

Technical assistance/ cost sharing programsConservation PlanningLand use planning assistance

The Pepin County Land Conservation Department has now initiated an update process for this plan. Anotice about the update was printed in the local Durand newspaper in August 2009.

Wisconsin Working Lands InitiativeThe Wisconsin Working Lands Initiative is included as part of the 2009 – 2011 state budget signedinto law by Governor Doyle on June 29, 2009. Three main components in the budget include updatesto the state’s current Farmland Preservation Program, the ability for farmers and local governments toestablish voluntary Agricultural Enterprise Areas, and a state grant program to help with the purchase


of Agricultural Conservation Easements. The website provides access to the statutory language fromthe budget bill and has more information about the Working Lands Initiative. The site is found at:www.datcp.state.wi.us/workinglands/index.jsp

PACE ProgramsPurchase of Agricultural Conservation Easements (PACE) is one program to transfer the rights todevelop a parcel of land to another entity. The easement is used to protect a specified portion ofproperty from further development. The American Farmland Trust can provide further informationabout these programs at www.farmland.org.

West Wisconsin Land Trust“A land trust is a private, nonprofit organization with a mission to conserve land and its resources.West Wisconsin Land Trust has helped protect many places throughout western Wisconsin wherepeople can enjoy their connection to the land, water and wildlife. Western Wisconsin’s intense growthpressures make it more important than ever that landowners and communities plan ahead for theprotection of natural area and working farms.” (Quoted from WWLT Brochure)

This organization serves 17 counties of Northwestern Wisconsin along the Minnesota border fromDouglas and Bayfield Counties south to Trempealeau and Jackson. The agency assists landownerswith conservation planning and protection of natural areas. Maiden Rock Bluff State Natural Area wasconserved with the assistance of the Trust agency in 2004. The Land Trust is located at 500 East MainStreet, Suite 307, Menomonie, WI 54751. Phone (715) 235-8850. Website: www.wwlt.org

TDR PlansTransfer of Development Rights (TDR) is another method of protecting land use. This plan involvestrading development rights in one area with protection of another area. A residential expansion mayrequire the purchase of a conservation easement in another region of the township. Additionalinformation can be found on the web at www.farmland.org

http://www.datcp.state.wi.us/workinglands/index.jsp


ImplementationINTRODUCTION

Towns will vary considerably in the ways that they will implement their plans. Some towns may belike villages and cities in their tax base and need to provide services, while others may have lowpopulation, a small tax base, and more limited planning needs. Also, there is a great deal of variety asto whether a town is in a county with general county zoning, and if so, whether the town is under suchzoning, and whether the town has its own regulatory tools such as a town zoning ordinance, a townsubdivision ordinance, official map, site plan review ordinance or historic preservation ordinance. Thissection also recognizes that implementation may be in non-regulatory programs as well. The townordinances which implement such measures will likely include appropriate plan commissionreferences. This section should be reviewed carefully by towns and adapted as necessary.

The Implementation Element can contain a statement of programs and specific actions to be completedin a stated sequence, including proposed changes to any applicable zoning ordinances, official maps,sign regulations, erosion and stormwater control ordinances, historic preservation ordinances, site planregulations, design review ordinances, building codes, mechanical codes, housing codes, sanitarycodes or subdivision ordinances, to implement the objectives, policies, plans, and programs containedin previous elements. This element will describe how each of the elements of the comprehensive planwill be integrated and made consistent with the other elements of the comprehensive plan, and shallinclude a mechanism to measure the community's progress towards achieving all aspects of thecomprehensive plan. This element will include a process for updating the comprehensive plan. Acomprehensive plan under this subsection shall be updated no less than once every 10 years.

As stated above, the final element in a comprehensive planning program is the implementation of theapproved Comprehensive Plan. Implementation can take the form of: 1) carrying out therecommendations in the plan for specific projects, for example, creating an Official Map; 2) using theplan as a guide to public and private decision-making on matters that relate to the development of thecommunity, for example, a rezoning request or a capital expenditure; and 3) reviewing and amendingthe plan as changes in the demographics, economy or political climate changes. The ImplementationElement of the Comprehensive Plan should include a list of changes needed in existing land usecontrols and recommendations for additional controls.

The completion of the Town of Pepin Comprehensive Plan represents the beginning of an ongoingprocess of planning within the community, not its conclusion. The implementation element is the lastof the nine elements of a comprehensive plan required by Section 66.1001of the Wisconsin Statutes.Section 66.1001 (2) (h) of the Statutes requires this element to include a compilation of programs, in aspecified sequence, to implement the recommendations set forth in the preceding eight elements.

The Town Board should consider continuing the work begun by the group of citizens who developedthe comprehensive plan by assigning additional tasks. A Plan Commission can work to develop aPlanned Land Use Map for the Town, and/or can address other planning issues as they emerge andchange in years to come.

The Statute also requires that the Implementation element:• Identify proposed changes to applicable zoning ordinances, subdivision ordinances, and officialmaps.


• Describe how each of the other eight elements of the comprehensive plan will be integrated and madeconsistent with other elements of the plan.• Include a mechanism to measure the Town of Pepin’s progress towards achieving therecommendations of the plan.• Include a process for amending and updating the plan. The Statutes require that a comprehensive planbe updated no less than once every 10 years.

Section 66.1001 (4) of the Statutes sets forth the required procedure for adoption or amendment of acomprehensive plan, which includes:• Adoption of a written public participation plan designed to foster public participation in thedevelopment of a comprehensive plan or a plan amendment.• Approval of a recommended plan by a resolution approved by a majority of the full membership ofthe plan commission.• Distribution of the draft plan for review and comment to:1

- The clerk of each adjacent local government and the Pepin County Clerk;- The Wisconsin Department of Administration;- MRRPC;- The public library serving the Town.

The parties listed above must also be provided with a copy of the adopted comprehensive plan and acopy of the adopting ordinance.• Adoption of the plan by an ordinance adopted by a majority of the full membership of the TownBoard.

Adoption of the plan by the Town Board must be preceded by at least one public hearing. A Class 1notice of the hearing must be published at least 30 days before the hearing. Written notice must also beprovided to persons who have applied for or been issued a permit for a nonmetallic mining reclamationplan, registered a nonmetallic mining site under Chapter NR 135 of the Wisconsin AdministrativeCode, or to owners or leaseholders of lands with nonmetallic resources who have requested notice ofthe hearing in writing. Other property owners who submitted a written request to the Town must alsobe notified of the hearing.

PLAN REVIEW AND ADOPTION

For any planning process, it is good practice to hold public informational meetings and hearings onrecommended plans before their adoption. Such actions provide an additional opportunity to acquaintresidents and landowners with the recommended plan and to solicit public reactions to the planrecommendations. The plan should then be modified to reflect any pertinent new information and toincorporate any sound and desirable new ideas advanced at these meetings. Accordingly, a publichearing will be held before the Town Board prior to adoption. The Town will provide a public noticeof the hearing in accordance with the requirements of the comprehensive planning law, and willdistribute the draft plan report to all of the parties specified in the law. An important step in planimplementation is the formal adoption of the recommended plan by the Town Board. Upon suchadoption, the plan becomes the official guide to be used by Town officials in making development orredevelopment decisions. The plan should serve as the basis on which all development proposals, such

1 The Wisconsin Department of Administration has stated that both draft and adopted plan reports may bedistributed in digital format, provided a paper copy of the report is available for review at the public libraryserving the community and at the Town Hall.


as zoning variance requests, subdivision plats, and certified survey maps, are reviewed. Only thosezoning actions or land divisions that are consistent with the plan should be approved.

PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURE

Changes to long-range planning documents are inevitable. Although a Planned Land Use Map is oftenthe focal point of comprehensive plans, plan amendments may include changes to the text or any of themaps included in this report. Text amendments may include:• Changing, adding, or modifying a goal, objective, policy, or program in any of the element chaptersin response to changing conditions or new information.• Adding or changing the land use plan categories in the Land Use Element to provide for a category ofdevelopment that is not incorporated into the current set of categories.• Updating inventory information.

In addition to text amendments, a land use plan map may be amended to change the designation, andtherefore the allowable uses, on a parcel or parcels of land. Other maps in the plan may be amended orupdated to reflect updated information, such as updated floodplain mapping or inventories of naturalresources or community facilities.

Rationale and Justification for Plan AmendmentAdjustments to the comprehensive plan should be made as required by changing conditions.Consequently, one of the important tasks of plan implementation is a periodic reevaluation to ensurethe plan continues to properly reflect current conditions. It is recommended that a general planreevaluation take place on an annual basis because the Town will continue to evolve and change overthe comprehensive plan design period. Periodic monitoring and updating of the plan will be an integralpart of the plan because the Town is a dynamic rather than static community. A more comprehensivereview of the plan is recommended every five years. It is recommended that the five-yearcomprehensive review utilize, to the extent practicable, an up-to-date database. The Town shouldconsider an extension of the plan for an additional five years with every five-year update to continuallyaccommodate 25 years of Town growth. The State comprehensive planning law requires the Townupdate the comprehensive plan at least once every 10 years.

Factors contributing to the possible need to amend this plan are due to the long-range nature of thistype of document. These factors are set forth in the following section to provide the necessaryguidance in conducting a plan amendment. The important aspect of plan amendment, however, is thatit should not be taken lightly. A plan amendment should be undertaken after careful study and byreason of one of the following factors:

Projections and Forecasts: Plans are based on projections or forecasts because plans deal with futuresituations. If projections or forecasts are in error, or require modification due to the emergence of newdata, then this plan may need to be adjusted. The plan should be monitored based on the preparation ofnew projections or forecasts. Comparisons should then be made between what was projected orforecast and what is actually happening. If warranted and deemed necessary by the Town Board uponrecommendation of the Plan Commission, this plan should be amended to accommodate the newprojections or forecasts.

Assumptions: A number of assumptions have been made upon which this plan and its various elementsare based. Assumptions may have to do with demographics, capital investment, or national policy. For


example, during the late 1960s and early 1970s a dramatic shift in birth rates occurred. Any plansbased on the assumption that the birth rate of the 1950s would continue were dramatically affected bythe change in birth rates which actually occurred. As stated earlier, the plan should be reviewed on anannual basis, which will afford an opportunity to reexamine the accuracy of any assumptions uponwhich this plan was based.

Data Error: An error in planning data differs from an assumption in that the faulty information isquantifiable. A new street may be under construction and designed to meet certain specifications. Aconstruction error, new Federal standards, or other factors may result in the street not being placed orfunctioning as planned. This, too, requires a plan reassessment and, perhaps, a plan amendment.

New Issues: Issues may evolve that were not critical or foreseen when this plan was initiallydeveloped. New issues may require modification of plan goals, objectives, policies, or programs--orthe creation of new plan goals, objectives, policies, or programs--to effectively deal with new issues.New factors affecting current issues can also present situations where this plan may have to beamended.

Comprehensiveness: The various elements of this plan are designed to guide future Town actions andspecific growth decisions. This plan recognizes, however, that some elements may benefit from moredetailed study and analysis. For major issues that require greater analysis than offered by this plan, aplan amendment may be justified. The amendment may be authorized by the Plan Commission at anytime.

Data Updates/Emergence of New Data: The maps, tables, and statistics upon which this plan is basedare factual in nature but may change through time (for example, when new decennial Census data isreleased). Thus, a general annual review of this plan is necessary and, where deemed appropriate bythe Town Board with recommendation(s) from the Plan Commission, amendments to this plan shouldbe made to keep data current.

Plan Amendment ProcessIt is critical to have and to follow guidelines when determining if an amendment to the plan isappropriate. All projections and assumptions should be reviewed in detail at meetings where Townofficials and citizens are provided information on new factors which might affect this plan. Officialsand citizens should be asked to submit any additional concerns of their own. This plan should berevised in a manner similar to its original development, with citizen participation prior to any change.The comprehensive planning law requires that any plan amendment follow the same procedure as thatfollowed for the adoption of this plan, including adoption of a public participation plan, a publichearing, approval of the plan amendment by a resolution of the PlanCommission, adoption of the amendment by an ordinance of the Town Board, and distribution of theplan amendment to the parties listed in Section 66.1001 (4) of the Statutes, including the Pepin CountyPlanning Department. It is recommended that the Town prepare and adopt a public participation planto be used for all plan amendments.

RECOMMENDED PROGRAMS

A comprehensive plan may recommend specific programs to achieve objectives listed in planelements. If a plan lists such programs the comprehensive planning law requires the ImplementationElement to include a compilation of programs, in a specified sequence, to implement the


recommendations set forth in the other required plan elements. The Town Recommended priorities forimplementing programs should be presented as High, Medium, and Low priorities. It is intended thatthe high priorities be addressed in the early years of the planning program. After five years, themedium and low priorities should again be reviewed and re-prioritized based on changing conditions.

CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE TOWN OF PEPINCOMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE TOWN OF PEPIN ORDINANCES

Section 66.1001 (3) of the Statutes requires that the following ordinances be consistent with a unit ofgovernment’s comprehensive plan by January 1, 2010:• County or local subdivision regulations under Section 236.45 or 236.46 of the Statutes.• County zoning ordinances enacted or amended under Section 59.69 of the Statutes.• Town or village zoning ordinances enacted or amended under Section 62.23 (7) of the Statutes.• Town zoning ordinances enacted or amended under Section 60.61 or 60.62 of the Statutes.• Zoning of shorelands or wetlands in shorelands under Section 59.692 (for counties), 61.351 (forvillages), or 62.231 (for cities) of the Statutes.(Official mapping is included in this list, but Pepin County and the Town of Pepin do not currently useofficial mapping and comprehensive zoning has not been established by ordinance. Official mappingstatutes are found in Section 62.23 (6).)

Beginning on January 1, 2010, local governments will need to use their comprehensive plan as a guideto be sure that implementation of local zoning, subdivision, and official mapping ordinances do notconflict with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan. If a conflict is found or would resultfrom a proposed action, the local government has the option of amending its comprehensive plan;however, plan amendments should follow the guidelines presented in this chapter and not be madearbitrarily.

The Statutes do not provide any guidance about how to determine if land use ordinance decisions areconsistent with a comprehensive plan. Specific guidance on how to apply the Statutory requirement forconsistency will, unfortunately, likely be provided over time through court decisions in lawsuitschallenging the implementation of comprehensive plans by County and local units of government afterthe consistency requirement takes effect in 2010.

Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map AmendmentsA Zoning Ordinance can be one of the primary implementing tools of a Comprehensive Plan. As such,it should substantially reflect and promote the achievement of plan goals, objectives, policies, andprograms. A zoning ordinance is a legal means for both guiding and controlling development withinthe Town, so that an orderly and desirable pattern of land use can be achieved which conforms to theplan and balances individual property rights with community interests and goals. A Zoning Ordinancewould contain provisions for regulating the use of property, the size of lots, the intensity ofdevelopment, site planning, the provision of open space, and the protection of natural resources.

Following adoption of this plan by the Town Board, the Plan Commission can be requested to continueto study the need for comprehensive zoning and development of a zoning (official) map. If the localgovernment proceeds to develop zoning ordinances, the regulations should be in conformance with theconcepts and proposals included in this plan. A planned land use map can be a starting point forofficial mapping and the other maps found in this plan would be used to determine areas to be assignedto use codes. Established uses must be studied extensively and land use codes not found should be


considered for inclusion in areas of the map, but the zoning map should not permit the establishment ofnew uses that are not consistent with the land use plan map or other recommendations of thecomprehensive plan, such as allowing residential development to occur in areas planned forcommercial use.

To avoid the potential pitfalls in developing a land use map, the Town should consider the followingapproaches in zoning map development:

• Areas of existing development (other than agricultural uses) would be placed in a zoning district thatis consistent with the planned land use map designation. In cases where the land use plan maprecommends a use that is different from existing uses, the zoning ordinance would be amended toinclude a transition overlay district that will allow the continuation of existing uses, but would requireapproval of a conditional use permit for the enlargement, reconstruction, or other changes to theexisting use that would otherwise not be permitted under the zoning ordinance regulations fornonconforming uses.

• Areas that are currently in agricultural use, and then zoned for such use, but shown on the land useplan map for future urban development would remain in agricultural zoning. Re-zonings that wouldaccommodate residential, commercial, industrial, or other urban use would be undertaken when aproperty owner submits a request for rezoning that specifies the proposed use of the property and,where required by the zoning ordinance, a proposed site plan; and where Town officials determine thatutilities and other governmental services needed to serve the proposed development are in place andthe proposed use is consistent with this plan and other local ordinance requirements.

• Areas that are currently in agricultural use and designated for agricultural use on the land use planmap will be zoned agricultural.

• Primary environmental corridors and other natural resource areas shown on the land use plan mapwould be placed in a conservancy or other appropriate zoning district (such as a park or ruralresidential zoning district).

Subdivision OrdinanceA Subdivision Ordinance can be another implementing tool of a comprehensive plan. It, too, shouldsubstantially reflect and promote the achievement of plan goals, objectives, polices, and programs. ASubdivision Ordinance is a legal means to regulate the division of land into smaller parcels. It wouldprovide for Town oversight of the creation of new parcels and helps to ensure that new development isappropriately located; lot size requirements specified in a Zoning Ordinance are observed; street rights-of-way are appropriately dedicated or reserved; access to arterial streets and highways is limited inorder to preserve traffic-carrying capacity and safety; adequate land for parks, drainage ways, andother open spaces is appropriately located and preserved; street, block, and lot layouts are appropriate;and adequate public improvements are provided.

CONSISTENCY AMONG PLAN ELEMENTS

The Implementation Element should “describe how each of the elements of the comprehensive planshall be integrated and made consistent with the other elements of the plan.” A review of the goals andobjectives found in the preceding elements provide common themes for this plan. The elements of this


comprehensive plan were prepared by subgroups and then carefully reviewed by all of the planningmembers.

PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN

Annual Report on Plan ImplementationIt is recommended that the Town of Pepin undertake a general plan reevaluation on an annual basis, asdescribed in the Plan Amendment Procedure section of this element. The annual reevaluation shouldinclude a report on plan implementation and progress in implementing the plan during the previousyear. The report should summarize how the comprehensive plan was used to direct policy decisionsmade by Town officials and whether circumstances have changed that have necessitated amendmentsto the comprehensive plan. The annual report should also include a list of all plan amendmentsapproved by the Town Board during the year.

Comprehensive Update of the PlanThe Town of Pepin should conduct a formal review of the plan at least once every five years, asrecommended in the Plan Amendment Procedure section of this element. Based on this review,changes or updates should be made to sections of the plan that are found to be out of date and goals,objectives, policies, or programs that are not serving their intended purpose. Any changes or updatesshould follow the formal process for plan amendments.


Appendix I –Survey Letter and Form (Reduced to Fit Page)

Town of PepinP.O. Box 172

Pepin, WI 54759

Dear Pepin Township Residents and Landowners:

The state of Wisconsin has asked all towns and villages to focus community attention on developing acomprehensive plan. This piece of legislation is commonly referred to as Smart Growth. Acomprehensive plan can be defined as an officially adopted statement that sets forth goals, policies andguidelines to direct future social, economic and physical development within a local jurisdiction.Wisconsin’s Comprehensive Plans incorporate a twenty-year vision that will provide a rational basisfor local land use decisions. The plans need to be completed by January 2010.

Members of the community and your local town board are working together to develop aComprehensive Plan. The state has outlined procedures for adopting plans and requires publicparticipation in the process. Nine elements must be included in a plan and they are as follows:

Issues and Opportunities Utilities and Community Facilities Intergovernmental CooperationHousing Economic Development Land UseTransportation Agricultural, Natural and Cultural

ResourcesImplementation

The planning group knows our community members have various views about these elements and wewant to hear from you. It is important for residents and land owners to express their vision about thefuture of Pepin Township. We want to look at where we are now, where we are going, where we wantto be and how we might get there. The attached survey is a first step towards offering you anopportunity to express your views. Individual surveys will be kept completely confidential. Theresults will be summarized and made available for public review.

Please give us your views by filling out a survey. Space is provided for your comments. Please returnthe survey in the stamped envelope provided. We appreciate your thoughts and will look forward toreceiving your survey by February 10th.

You may make additional copies of the survey for members of your household or request additionalcopies of the survey by calling Lou Seyffer at 715-442-6423 or Betty Bergmark at 715-442-2087.

Sincerely,

Town of Pepin Comprehensive Plan Committee

Robert Bjerstedt, Town Board Chairman Gary Samuelson James ReeserDennis Wolfe Lou Seyffer Alice Auth Carol InderiedenJim Sterry Mark Johnson Rob Meyer Betty Bergmark


Town of Pepin Survey 2009Please circle a response letter or mark X next to selected response. Comments may be continued on last page.

1. Which of the following best describes your Pepin Township residency?

___ Permanent resident ___ Part-time resident Other _______________________________

2. Do you: ___ Own home ___ Rent your dwelling ___ Own Land Only

3. How would you rate the overall quality of life in the Town of Pepin? (Please circle a letter.)

a. Excellent b. Good c. Fair d. Poor e. No opinion

4. Over the next ten years, do you expect the quality of life in the Town of Pepin to: (Please circle aletter.)

a. Improve b. Stay the same c. Worsen d. No opinion

5. Does adequate housing exist in the Township? ___ Yes ___ No

(If ‘No’, what type is needed:__________________________________________________________)

6. Are the highways, roads and bridges adequate for mobility in the Township? ___ Yes ___ No

7. Are the highways, road and bridges sufficiently maintained in Pepin Township? ___ Yes ___ No

8. What changes or improvements in highways, roads or bridges would you recommend?__________

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

9. How would you rate the air quality within the township?

a. Excellent b. Good c. Fair d. Poor

10. How would you rate the quality of our lakes, streams and rivers?

a. Excellent b. Good c. Fair d. Poor

11. How would you rate the quality of your ground water?

a. Excellent b. Good c. Fair d. Poor e. Don’t Know

12. Have you had your well water tested within the last 5 years? ___ Yes ___ No

13. Comments, suggestions on air or water quality: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

14. Rate the following categories of government services: (Place X under your selection.)

Excellent Good Fair Poor No Opinion

Fire protection

EMS (Emergency Medical Service)

School district

Services for elderly persons

Services for disabled persons

Planning and zoning

Town Board communication with residents

Town administrative services

15. Suggestions/comments about local government services:___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


16. Listed below are several types of growth or uses for land. Please tell us how strongly yougenerally support or oppose each type: (Place an X under one column heading for each type.)

StronglySupport

SupportSomewhat

OpposeSomewhat

StronglyOppose

NoOpinion

Residential subdivisions

Single-family homes not in subdivisions

Housing for Seniors

Duplexes, Apartments

Mobile home parks

Commercial/Retail

Professional/office

Manufacturing/industrial

Hobby farms

Family farms

Large scale commercial farms

Recreation, non-motorized (e.g. parks,golf courses)

Recreation, motorized (e.g. go-carts,motocross)

Warehousing/contractor or mini-storage

Non-metallic mining (sand, rock, etc.)

17. Please list other types of development you support or oppose or enter comments about growth and land use:____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

18. For each of the following statements, select one choice that best matches your opinion. Enter X in one column for eachitem. Local government or other government agencies or legislatures should:

StronglyAgree

Agree DisagreeStronglyDisagree

NoOpinion

Encourage agricultural land preservation

Allow new growth only in and near cities,villages

Encourage residential development

Encourage commercial projects

Encourage industrial projects

Promote more recreational-orientatedbusinesses

Promote more small non-farm businesses

Preserve our town’s scenic beauty

Make natural resource protection a highpriorityPreserve flood plains, wildlife habitat andwaterwaysWork to preserve farmland by limitingdevelopment


18. (Continued) For each of the following statements, select one choice that best matches your opinion.

StronglyAgree Agree Disagree Strongly

DisagreeNo

Opinion

Limits should be set on the number ofanimals that a farmer may raise

Allow me to do whatever I want with myland

Allow my neighbors to do whatever theywant with their land

Crop land is disappearing at an alarmingrate

New housing in prime farm areas shouldnot be allowed

Farm operations should not be restrictedby government regulations

Invest more money to maintain existinginfrastructure before creating moreinfrastructure (e.g. roads, sewer)

Require developers to pay for the addedcosts of providing local services that areneeded to serve their projects.

Develop long range plans to controldevelopment

Develop land use and developmentregulations

Maintain pace of development, it is justright

Lower property taxes even if this means areduction in the current level of service

19. What are the two or three most important things Pepin Township should do over the next 20years?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

20. Please provide any additional comments about Smart Growth/Comprehensive Planning withinPepin Township in the space below:__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Please return your completed survey in the postage-paid envelope provided.Please mail by February 10, 2009.


Appendix II


Appendix III

County: PEPIN Record #: 24686 Location: HIGHWAY CC, E SIDE, BETWEEN PEPIN AND LUND

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2315W-15 Quarter Sections:

Civil Town: PEPIN National Register Date: State Register Date:

Unincorporated Community: District:

Current Name: NR Multiple Property Name:

Survey Map: USGS Pepin 7.5' Historic Name: Wall Material: Brick

Map Code: 91-60 Construction Date: Structural System:

Survey Date: 1983 Designer Name: Other Buildings on Site?:

Style or Form: Front Gabled Cultural Affiliation:

Resource Type: Demolished Date:

County: PEPIN Record #: 24687 Location: PEPIN HILL RD, .4 M E OF COUNTY HIGHWAY N

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2314W-05 Quarter Sections: NE SE




Survey Map: USGS ELLA Historic Name: Wall Material: Clapboard

Map Code: 2/29 Construction Date: Structural System:


Style or Form: Two Story Cube Cultural Affiliation:

Resource Type: house Demolished Date:

County: PEPIN Record #: 24688 Location: COUNTY HIGHWAY N, W SIDE, 1.4 M N OF CROSS RD

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2314W-08 Quarter Sections: SW NW




Survey Map: USGS WABASHA N Historic Name: Wall Material: Clapboard



Style or Form: Gabled Ell Cultural Affiliation:



County: PEPIN Record #: 24689 Location: BIG HILL RD, E SIDE, .3 M N OF COULEE RD

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2314W-09 Quarter Sections: NW SE




Survey Map: USGS WABASHA N Historic Name: Wall Material: Wood Shingle



Style or Form: Bungalow Cultural Affiliation:


County: PEPIN Record #: 24690 Location: 16TH CR RD, .1 M S OF CROSS RD

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2314W-20 Quarter Sections: NE NW




Survey Map: USGS WABASHA N Historic Name: Wall Material: Clapboard



Style or Form: Side Gabled Cultural Affiliation:

Resource Type: house

County: PEPIN Record #: 24691 Location: COUNTY HIGHWAY N, E SIDE, .4 M S OF CROSS RD

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2314W-20 Quarter Sections: NW SW




Survey Map: USGS WABASHA N Historic Name: Wall Material: Brick



Style or Form: Gabled Ell Cultural Affiliation:



County:PEPIN

Record #:24692

Location: COUNTY HIGHWAY I, S SIDE, .5 M W OF BACK VALLEY RD(HICKS VALLEY RD)

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2315W-01 Quarter Sections: NW NE




Survey Map: USGS NERIKE HILL Historic Name: Wall Material: Clapboard





County: PEPIN Record #: 24693 Location: LYLE RD, W END, .5 M W OF BACK VALLEY RD

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2315W-12 Quarter Sections:




Survey Map: USGS Pepin 7.5' Historic Name: Wall Material: Clapboard

Map Code: see AC Construction Date: 1908 Structural System:


Style or Form: Astylistic UtilitarianBuilding

Cultural Affiliation:

Resource Type: centric barn Demolished Date:

County: PEPIN Record #: 24696 Location: STATE HIGHWAY 35, N SIDE, .1 M W OFBOGUS RD





Survey Map: USGS PEPIN Historic Name: Wall Material: Stone - Unspecified



Style or Form: Astylistic Utilitarian Cultural Affiliation:


Building

Resource Type: other Demolished Date:

County: PEPIN Record #: 24697 Location: STATE HIGHWAY 35 AND SHORTCUT RD, NECNR

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2315W-27 Quarter Sections: NE NE




Survey Map: USGS PEPIN Historic Name: MC CALL HOUSE Wall Material: Brick

Map Code: 2/26 Construction Date: 1860 Structural System:


Style or Form: Front Gabled Cultural Affiliation:


County:PEPIN

Record #:24713

Location: COUNTY HIGHWAY CC, E SIDE, .4 M S OFCOUNTY HIGHWAY SS

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2415W-27 Quarter Sections: NW NW




Survey Map: USGS NERIKE HILL Historic Name: Wall Material: Wood



Style or Form: Astylistic Utilitarian Building Cultural Affiliation:

Resource Type: centric barn Demolished Date:

County:PEPIN

Record #:24714

Location: COUNTY HIGHWAY CC, S SIDE, .4 M W OFCOUNTY HIGHWAY SS

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2415W-28 Quarter Sections: NE NE



Current Name: LUND MISSIONCONVENT CHURCH

NR Multiple Property Name:

Survey Map: USGS NERIKE HILL Historic Name: LUND MISSION Wall Material:


CONVENT CHURCH Clapboard


Survey Date: 1982 Designer Name:Other Buildings onSite?:

Style or Form: Gothic Revival Cultural Affiliation:

Resource Type: church Demolished Date:

County:PEPIN

Record #:24716

Location: COUNTY HIGHWAY J, E SIDE, .4 M S OF COUNTYHIGHWAY CC




Current Name: SABYLAND LUTHERANCHURCH

NR Multiple Property Name:

Survey Map: USGS NERIKE HILL Historic Name: Wall Material: Brick

Map Code: 1/11 Construction Structural System:

Survey Date: 1982 Designer Name: Other Buildings on

Style or Form: Gothic Revival Cultural Affiliation:

Resource Type: church Demolished Date:

County:PEPIN

Record #:24717

Location: COUNTY HIGHWAY CC, S SIDE, 4 DOORS W OFCOUNTY HIGHWAY J

City or Village: Town, Range, Section: 2415W-28 Quarter Sections: NE NW


Unincorporated Community: LUND District:


Survey Map: USGS NERIKE HILL Historic Name: Wall Material: Clapboard

Map Code: 1/9 Construction Date: 1900 Structural System:




The following records were deleted because the structures no longer exist. (The original records canbe found at www.wisconsinhistory.org/ahi)Record # 24688 home; Record # 24712, round barn; Record # 24715, Lund Service Station; Record #24725, Barry Corner school; Record # 29210, old Chippewa River bridge

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/ahi

town pepin comprehensive plan379104f9-0de8-498c-8406... · fights were common among indian groups...

Documents