Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Sherwood over algae, odor and operating level at Mustang detention pond
Summary
Neighbors and the village debated causes and remedies for heavy algae and low water concerns at Mustang detention pond; engineers proposed prevention (buffers, erosion controls), wetland plantings, aeration and chemical options with estimated costs.
Residents surrounding Mustang detention pond raised repeated complaints during 2005 Village Board meetings about algae blooms, odors and what they described as abnormally low water levels.
At several meetings residents and homeowners’ representatives described persistent algae mats, unpleasant odors and diminished recreational or aesthetic value. The Board heard detailed engineering analysis from McMahon Associates’ engineer Nick Vande Hey and others: watershed changes and urbanizing land uses are increasing nutrient loads and sediment; prevention steps include stronger construction-site erosion controls, vegetated buffers and measures to discourage geese and manage pet waste.
Vande Hey and consultants outlined pond remediation and management options and provided cost estimates: planting emergent wetland species at inlets/outlets to uptake nutrients; fish stocking (fathead minnows) to reduce algae; and mechanical aeration. The consultants estimated a diffused-aeration system for Mustang Pond would cost roughly $7,000–$10,000 in capital expenses and about $1,000 per year to maintain. Chemical herbicide controls were described as another option ($400–$600 per acre per application plus DNR permitting and repeated applications may be required).
Village staff said Native Solutions was contracted to install native prairie/wetland plantings around the pond perimeter as a longer-term filter; staff also applied for a temporary fishery/herbicide permit from state authorities to allow targeted chemical treatment if necessary. The Board instructed staff to obtain bids and technical proposals for non-toxic chemical treatments and to coordinate planting and any chemical program with aquatic biologists so plantings are not compromised.
What happens next: the Village will pursue a mix of short-term mitigations (permitting and possible chemical treatment when allowable) and longer-term measures (plantings, erosion controls) and will solicit costed proposals for aeration and other engineering options before committing additional public funds.
