Submit a project summary now!

FREE consultations for any new project    • Up front, firm quotes on most projects    • Competitive rates and pricing

Lets Get Started

View Our Services

• Land Development • Engineering Studies • Environmental Services • Site Development • Public Works • Land Surveying
Welcome to Davel Engineering & Environmental Inc.

At Davel Engineering & Environmental Inc., it's not just the range of services we provide, but the philosophy we bring to what we do. To us, each project is unique and we work hard to provide excellence at a reasonable cost. We serve all communities in the Fox Valley and serve all of Northeast Wisconsin and upper Michigan.

We understand the details.
Our first job at Davel Engineering & Environmental Inc. is to listen. We know that missing important information about the scope or nature of your project can cost you time and money. That's why we listen up front to develop a thorough understanding of your project goals and objectives. Our aim is to get it right the first time, protecting you from project delays and unexpected costs whenever possible.

"They listen up front and get a very thorough understanding of the project. We've worked with larger firms where mistakes in understanding the scope and details of the project have lead to project delays and increased costs."

View Our Client Testimonials
like us on Facebook
like us on Facebook

Dec 31, 2018 - 9:05 pm
We appreciate all of our clients, friends and collegues and wish all a very happy and prosperous new year!

Nov 28, 2018 - 11:15 pm
Kimberly Heights in Village of Harrison recently opened its final phase of lots. Copies of the drainage plans and final plats are available on our website at:

Jul 22, 2018 - 11:13 pm
Almost 441-41-10

May 4, 2018 - 11:23 pm
Recent project

Feb 8, 2018 - 4:19 am
This bill should help with most wetland issue that we face in development.

Dec 22, 2017 - 2:17 am
I made some of those comments!

Nov 30, 2017 - 11:28 pm
Wetland Regulation reform coming soon? Our firm is not in favor in any shape way or form of promoting the distruction of valuable wetland resources! With that said, the current state of wetland regulation needs to change. For example, the photo is of the old K-Mart development on West College Ave in Appleton. The building has been demolished but the parking lot remains. It has been an abandoned site for years. Enough time, in fact, for the parking lot to begin to disintegrate and wetland vegetation to emerge through the pavement. Now I may be jumping to conclusions to assume that this former parking lot would meet the scientific definition of a wetland, but let us assume it would for the purpose of this example. In my experience, I have seen such similiar circumstances, but there are other factors to consider. If a developer would choose to redevelop this site, he would first (assuming we do have a wetland) have to delineate this wetland and then obtain permits to disturb it from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, since this so-called wetland would not qualify for any of the current wetland exemptions. And since this site is near a navigable stream, this wetland would likely be also considered a federal wetland which would also involve the US Army Corps of Engineers. During the current permitting process this wetland would be treated the same as any other wetland, including those the Wisconsin Wetland Association and other groups would hold up as those wetlands that need to be protected. There is no consideration given during the process for the economics (profit) for the developer. As a side bar, there is a consideration of wetland or stream history which would mean that maybe back in the day the K-Mart site was built on a wetland and now that it has been left to disintegrate, it is re-emerging as its former self. The proposed reform bill would allow for this to be considered. Since this example is a bit on the extreme side, I should mention the more frequent occurance of farmed wetlands which are quite problematic when the farmer sells to a developer for a new subdivision. An isolated (non-federal wetland) in the middle of a corn field can certainly and easily be avoided by the subdivision designer, so a permit to fill it is quite difficult to obtain. Many times they are avoided at great expense, loss of profit and effort only to become a vacant area in the neighborhood that gets mowed and filled or otherwise ignored an unappreciated. In these cases, the farmer is allowed to disturb them, drain them via tiles and/or ditches for the purposes of farming. But when the use changes the developer has to consider them as wetlands which are regulated. The argument being, that if the wetlands were left alone, they would emerge as a valuable resource. This is a false choice, since the land will either continue to be farmed and disturbed every year or it will be developed. It will never be left alone. And if presumed that it must be left alone, it only hurts the farmer, who realizes less money on the sale since the land cannot be developed. So back to K-Mart... The applicant would need to answer in the application to disturb wetlands why the development has to occur on this site (rather than other lands without wetlands) and how the developers plans could be modified to reduce or eliminate the wetland impact on this property. A permit to fill wetlands is supposed to be granted to only water dependent activities. If your business does not need to be by water, it does not need to disturb wetlands! Avoiding redevelopment of this site would continue the blight in an otherwise urbanized area, forgo the increased property tax value of new development, and likely lead to sprawl. Attempting to develop the site and also avoid (and preserve) wetland in the center of the property is not efficient or economical development and is just plain nonsensical. The reform being proposed ( would consider this wetland exempt, which would clearly be the most expedient result. Another benefit (for the environment) that would come from passage is required mitigation for all non-exempt wetlands disturbed, even those that would become non-regulated. Therefore, there would be no net loss of wetlands and in fact a net gain due to the formula for mitigation. For those who may believe that thousands of acres of wetlands will be bulldozed, I would suggest that they do not understand the cost of mitigation which is currently around $70,000 per acre. At this price the wetland is more valuable than the upland, so there would be economic forces in play that would lead the developers to avoid wetland impacts even though the wetland may be unregulated. Of course, the devil may be in the details as I do have some concerns. The major benefit to developers comes via the deregulation of non federal wetlands. Currently, the Corps can claim jurisdiction over almost any wetland they choose via a "significant nexus" argument, which a developer is free to challenge in court if he has an endless supply of money. A clear understanding of what is to be non-regulated is essential. Also, there are clearly some non federal wetlands that are natural and of high quality that deserve and need the protection of our State. I am looking forward to seeing the needed protection for these wetlands. Our State DNR is understaffed as it is and Wisconsin has tremendous natural resources that need protection. They are after all the Department of Natural Resources, not the Department of Puddles and Ditches! Puddles in corn fields, road side ditches, construction sites and parking lots do not need to be regulated to the same degree as our State's lakes, rivers, and streams. Over the years, we have been active in promoting this reform on behalf of our clients. Through the Valley Home Builders Assoc, we assisted in presenting our ideas of reform to then Secretary Kathy Stepp in the fall of 2015. Earlier this fall, we assisted Rep Steineke and Senator Roth prepare a video to help explain the need for this type of reform by providing some examples. At Davel Engineering and Environmental, we provide a variety of environmental related services. For more informaiton on these services, please visit our website at . Why would we help promote work that would lead to less work for our firm? I guess it is like a doctor prescribing unnecessary surgery. It just not right!

Oct 13, 2017 - 4:58 pm
Could it be?

Sep 29, 2017 - 3:24 pm
Jacobsen Meadows 2 in the Village of Fox Crossing Recently opened for Construction. Builders may obtain plans from our website at

Sep 19, 2017 - 4:45 pm
The Town of Grand Chute has some notoriously poor soils for construction. The soils are silty and when wet have very poor strength. Usually I have seen contractors work to dry up the site and dewater to improve the soil strength. At White Hawk Apartments, the contractor is using soil stabilization using portland cement. The cement is dry spread on the soil and then incorporated into the soil with the large roto-tiller shown.

Dec 31, 2018 - 9:05 pm
We appreciate all of our clients, friends and collegues and wish all a very happy and prosperous new year!