The URL can be used to link to this page

06.f Barr DSES CUP - CC Packet 1 | P a g e Date of Meeting: October 21, 2025 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: T.J. Hofer, Consultant City Planner Re: Conditional Use Permits for Distribution Solar Energy Systems at 11522 Mayberry Trail North Applicant: Jesse Dimond, MN CSG 2019-69 LLC; New Energy Equity, LLC Zoning: AG-C, SM-O, SES-O Owner: Dean D Barr Trust Future Land Use: Agricultural Core Location: PID: 2003220240002 11522 Mayberry Trail North Review Deadline November 15, 2025 The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for a Distribution Solar Energy Systems (DSES) on the parcel located at 11522 Mayberry Trail North (subject property). The staff report to the Planning Commission from the October 7, 2025, meeting is attached and includes the background of the request as well as an analysis based on the standards in the Unified Development Code. PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission heard the application at their October 7, 2025, meeting and held a public hearing. Three comments were received during the public hearing, one of which include a representative for the applicant. Comments included: • Comment made related to the existing DSES to the north of the subject property and asked about maintenance of the proposed use. • Comment made about screening, setbacks, and visibility from Big Marine Lake and asked about the expiration term of the permit. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed the concerns outlined by staff within the report. The issues with the glare study and apparent gap in screening were both acknowledged, but the Planning Commission concurred with staff regarding the glare analysis 2 | P a g e not accounting for the use and screening to the north of the subject property. The apparent gap in screening shown on the simulations submitted by the applicant was confirmed to not exist during the site visit conducted by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission further discussed the number of poles within the setback and the proposed overhead wires. The Commission acknowledged that if the lines were to be buried the pole alignments would change. Staff explained that if the overhead lines within the first approximately 582 ft. from Mayberry, that two poles would likely be needed near the right-of- way or street, one interconnection pole and one riser pole. The applicant noted during the discussion that the overhead wires from the Mayberry on to the site and location of poles is Xcel’s preference. The Planning Commission discussed how spacing the poles out more may create a better visual aesthetic, but that the code requires the lines to be buried. The Commission asked staff what would happen if the city approved the plan with conditions to bring the site plan into compliance. Staff informed the Commission that all conditions in an approving resolution must be met and if through the design process it was identified that Xcel was unable to allow buried wires, then the site plan would be inconsistent with the approvals and would need to request a site plan amendment, which would be heard by Planning Commission and City Council. The Planning Commission moved to recommend approval of the request. The motion was approved with a vote of 4-0 (Rynders absent), with conditions recommended by staff to bring the site into compliance with the Unified Development Code. ANALYSIS Review Comments The submittal was sent to city staff and other regulatory agencies for review and comment. Staff have included two comments described below. Engineering Department The City Engineer has provided a comment letter which is attached. Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District CMSCWD has stated that the Watershed considers solar panels to be an impervious surface and the applicant will be required to submit for a permit from the Watershed. Staff Analysis Staff finds that the proposed plan is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and UDC, however, aspects of the proposal are inconsistent. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the application with conditions that address the issues outlined by staff in the staff report prepared for the Planning Commission. Staff anticipates changes to the site plan based on the requirement from CMSCWD, however, changes are expected to have little to no impact on the zoning requirements for the use. If any 3 | P a g e changes to the site plan impact zoning requirements, a major site plan modification will be required, which is reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council. COUNCIL ACTION The City Council can do one of the following: 1. Approve, with or without conditions, of the attached resolution. 2. Deny, with findings, of the attached resolution. 3. Table the request for further review/study. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends the following: Motion to approve Resolution 10-21-25-03 approving a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a Distribution SES at 11522 Mayberry Trail North, with the findings and conditions established in the attached Resolution 10-21-25-03. Attachments A. Resolution 10-21-25-03 Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a Distribution Solar Energy System B. Comments from Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District, dated September 30. 2025 C. City Engineer Comment, dated October 8, 2025 D. Planning Commission “Conditional Use Permits for Distribution Solar Energy Systems at 11522 Mayberry Trail North” Packet, October 7, 2025 CITY OF SCANDIA, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 10-21-25-03 APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DISTRIBUTION SCALE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM LOCATED ON 20.032.20.24.0002 LOCATED AT 11522 MAYBERRY TRAIL NORTH WHEREAS, Jesse Dimond, MN CSG 2019-69 LLC; New Energy Equity, LLC (the “applicant” or the “operator”), on behalf of Dean D Barr Trust (the “owner”), made an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a Distribution Solar Energy System (SES) to be located at PID 20.032.20.24.0002 located at 11522 Mayberry Trail North: THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT THREE (3), EXCEPT THE NORTH 151 FEET, IN SECTION TWENTY (20), TOWNSHIP THIRTY-TWO (32), RANGE TWENTY (20), LYING NORTH AND WEST OF THE TOWNSHIP ROAD PRESENTLY RUNNING OVER AND ACROSS SAID TRACT, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA. AND THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 32 NORTH, RANGE 20 WEST, WASHINGTON COUNTY, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 483.50 FEET OF THE SOUTH 587.0 FEET THEREOF , WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request for the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) at a duly noticed Public Hearing on October 7, 2025, and recommended that the City Council approve the CUP, with conditions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCANDIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it approves of a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a Distribution SES, located at 10929 Scandia Trail North, based on the following findings: 1. Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan include promoting the use of renewable energy systems on housing and in areas where such systems can be safely operated and produce a minimum level of visual impact. The Distribution Solar Energy System (DESE) is allowed through a Conditional Use Permit within the SES-O district and helps obtain the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff have included conditions to address the conditions established within the Unified Development Code (UDC). 2. The DSES will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. Reasonable conditions of approval can be added if the Planning Commission finds issues with the proposed SES. 3. The DSES use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values or scenic views. Screening for roadways and nearby dwellings i s required as a condition of approval. The proposed system meets setbacks as required within the UDC. 4. The proposed DSES will not impede development or improvement of surrounding properties. 5. The proposed DSES use is not anticipated to substantially increase use, cause undue wear, or cause any detriment that is atypical from regular use. 6. The proposed use is consistent with the applicable regulations of the AG-C District and generally consistent with the use specific standards within the UDC for DSES. Reasonable conditions have been included with the approval to address where the application is inconsistent with the standards of the UDC. Any significant changes to the DSES or site plan will be required to conform with the applicable regulations of the district and the Conditional Use Permit must be amended to allow for the change. 7. The Conditional Use Permit conflicts with a number of the specific performance standards established in Section 153.300.030 (BB), that must be addressed. Staff have included conditions where the application does not meet these standards. FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval shall be met: 1. The project shall be in substantial compliance with the plans reviewed and approved with this request, with the exception of where revisions are required with this approval. 2. Treatment of stormwater runoff should be consistent with MPCA storm water manual guidance for solar projects. 3. Facility location and design must minimize impact on habitat and wildlife movement. 4. Before a building permit can be issued on the site the following must occur: a. The applicant must complete an interconnection agreement with a local utility and provide a copy of the agreement to the City. The system operator must provide a visible external disconnect if required by the utility. b. The applicant shall complete a Developer Agreement with the City. The Agreement shall include financial guarantees acceptable to the City), to assure compliance with the Vegetative Escrow, Landscaping Plan, and Decommissioning Plan. The Development Agreement shall be signed by the City and the applicant before the City approves the final permit for the solar installation. c. The City will require the establishment of an escrow account, from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota, to ensure vegetation is installed and establishes itself as identified in the approved permit, based on an estimated cost for plantings and labor provided by the applicant. The planting and screening plan must utilize the recommended plant types described in Section [153.400.060] and must be approved by the City. d. The City will require the posting of a bond, letter of credit or the establishment of an escrow account to ensure decommissioning. The decommissioning plan must provide a letter of credit that does not give credit towards salvage material. The guarantee shall be from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota. e. The applicant must submit proof that a current general liability policy covering bodily injury and property damage with limits of at least $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate or the maximum liability thresholds set forth Minnesota Statutes, section 466.04, as amended, whichever is greater, to the City. f. The screening shall fully obscure 100% view of the solar panel area from any adjacent road right-of-way immediately upon screen completion in accordance with this section, and shall be completed prior to the remainder of solar facilities and panel installation. Effectiveness of screening shall be reviewed and approved by city staff prior to continuation of project installation. g. A MPCA General Stormwater Permit will be required. h. The applicant must demonstrate how a backhoe would be able to access all proposed stormwater facilities in the future to perform maintenance. i. Submitted plans must be revised to be consistent with the conditions in this approval, including but not limited to: i. Proposed plantings shall, at minimum, meet the standards established in Table 153.400.060-2. ii. Power and communication lines that are not defined in this the UDC as Essential Services and running between banks of solar panels and the interconnection pole or other point of interconnection must be buried underground. iii. A grading plan and erosion control plan shall be submitted and meet the standards in the UDC and be approved by the City Engineer. 5. If any concrete is used onsite for construction, all wash outs from cement trucks shall not be dumped on site. 6. If any scenic canvas becomes damaged or fades to point it no longer camouflages prior to the completion of the compliance period to establish vegetative cover, said canvas must be replaced with 60 days of notice to the landowner and owner of the Distribution SES. 7. The required screening must be achieved within six growing seasons from the date of project approval. If the screening is not established within 6 growing seasons, it must be implemented through the planting of mature vegetation to fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels as described in current ordinance. Once vegetative screening is established, the scenic canvas must be removed. 8. The applicant shall maintain landscaping and screening for the full term of the permit up to the site being decommissioned. The City may enter and inspect the property, outside the area protected around the array by fencing, at any reasonable time for the purpose of investigating a reported violation or to ascertain compliance or noncompliance with the current standards or approvals regulating screening. 9. The City reserves the right to utilize the vegetative escrow required with the permit to address noncompliance with approved screening if the applicant or operator does not bring the site into compliance within nine months. 10. If glare is reported as a nuisance staff will review the existing conditions and the applicant must address any concerns identified by staff to bring the use into compliance with the current regulations. 11. No exterior lighting is proposed or approved with this approval. 12. The first 50 ft. of the access road off of MN 97 shall be either bituminous or concrete to prevent tracking sediment onto MN 97. 13. The applicant shall stake the required setback from Mayberry Trail North so that the Building Inspector can verify the setbacks before construction begins. 14. Signage must be installed that clearly identifies the array and emergency contacts that are responsible in the case of an emergency within three months of a final building permit being issued. Signage must be screened from public right of way and residential uses within 350 ft. 15. Signs, informational, or visual communication devices shall comply with applicable regulations. 16. All plans submitted for building permit approval shall be prepared by a licensed, professional engineer. 17. Any expansion of the DSES shall require an amended conditional use permit. 18. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits prior to work on the site, including but not limited to: a. The Distribution Scale Solar Energy System shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulatory standards, including the current Uniform Building Code, the National Electric Code, the State Plumbing Code, and the Minnesota Energy Code. b. Driveway access permits from the City of Scandia shall be secured for the access drives before the City approves the final permit for the solar installation. c. The applicant shall obtain the required Watershed District permit(s). d. The applicant shall obtain the required grading and erosion control permit from the City. e. The applicant shall obtain the required building permit from the City. 19. The applicant shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal permits and requirements for the new development on the parcel. 20. The City may revoke the Conditional Use Permit for the site if the site is not in compliance with any condition of this approval and if all permits and required work to comply with approvals from other local, state, and federal permits is not completed. 21. The applicant/operator of the DSES shall pay all costs incurred by the city to monitor compliance with conditions of the Conditional Use Permit 22. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application. Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 21 day of October 2025. Steve Kronmiller, Mayor Jesse Dimond, Applicant Dean Barr, Owner Justin Barr, Trustee to DEAN D BARR TRUST ATTEST: Kyle Morell, City Administrator 1 TJ Hofer From:Tom Langer <tom.langer@cmscwd.org> Sent:Monday, September 29, 2025 8:59 PM To:TJ Hofer Subject:RE: Barr DSES CUP - 11522 Mayberry Trl N (PID 2003220240002) *** WARNING: This email is from outside the company. Proceed with Caution*** Hi TJ, Apologies that I haven’t been able to review the submittal items but can o Ưer a previous Engineer’s review for the project (4/9/25 review comments below). In short, solar panels are considered to be an impervious surface and therefore this project will trigger the need for a District permit for ESC and stormwater mitigation. Additionally, there are wetlands nearby that we would support the City’s setbacks applying, if encroachment is allowed, the District buƯer rule would become applicable. 4/9/25 review summary provided to applicant: Rule 2 Stormwater Management – Solar panels are considered impervious. A stormwater management plan satisfying District management standards for rate control, water quality treatment, volume control, and wetland bounce and inundation is required all impervious surfaces including the panels, access roads, and equipment pads (refer to District Rule 2.4 for details). Existing and proposed condition reporting of site runoƯ conditions, hydrologic models and subwatershed maps are required (refer to Rule 2.6 for required exhibit details). The two proposed basin are not likely to satisfy District stormwater management standards nor are they likely to receive runoƯ from the majority of proposed impervious surface. Details for routing of stormwater runo Ư from impervious surfaces will be required. Onsite soils are mapped as HSG A, so infiltration BMPs are likely feasible. Soil borings at proposed BMPs locations are required to confirm infiltration feasibility. A planting plan for BMPs will also be required. Finally, a declaration for maintenance of stormwater management facilities will also be required for permit issuance. Rule 3 Erosion & Sediment Control – An erosion and sediment control plan is required because Rule 2 is applicable. Minimum requirements include perimeter control downgradient of disturbed areas, protection of stormwater BMPs during construction or staging of BMPs after stabilization of disturbed areas, revegetation specifications, and a construction entrance to minimize tracking of sediment from the site. Rule 4 BuƯers – This rule may be applicable if Scandia requires a variance from wetland setback requirements. If this rule is triggered establishment of a buƯer, recording of buƯer declaration, and a preparation of planting plan to establish adequate vegetation for any areas of the buƯer that are disturbed (if any) will be required. The western onsite wetland is a District Management Category 3 wetland, with a standard buƯer width of 50-feet. The eastern wetland that extends oƯsite is a District Management Category 2 wetland, with a standard buƯer width of 75-feet. 2 Tom Langer Senior Riparian Specialist | Carnelian Marine St. Croix Watershed District 11660 Myeron Rd North | Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone:  (651) 275-7452 | Cell: 507-276-8056  www.cmscwd.org Inquiries or Submittals: https://www.cmscwd.org/permits-overview District Rules: https://www.cmscwd.org/rules Permit Forms & Deadlines: https://www.cmscwd.org/residential-permits From: TJ Hofer <tj.hofer@bolton-menk.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:07 AM To: Ryan Goodman <Ryan.Goodman@bolton-menk.com>; c.fischer@ci.scandia.mn.us; Mike Hinz <mike.hinz@scandiafire.com>; Tom Langer <tom.langer@cmscwd.org>; Scollan, Daniel (DNR) (daniel.scollan@state.mn.us) <daniel.scollan@state.mn.us>; Isiah Bubany <Isiah.Bubany@bolton-menk.com> Cc: k.morell@ci.scandia.mn.us; b.eklund@ci.scandia.mn.us; Amanda Johnson <ajohnson@eckberglammers.com> Subject: Barr DSES CUP - 11522 Mayberry Trl N (PID 2003220240002) All, Please find the submiƩal materials in the following link for a condiƟonal use permit applicaƟon to allow for a distribuƟon solar energy system located at 11522 Mayberry Trl N (PID 2003220240002) in Scandia, MN: Barr DSES CUP - 11522 Mayberry Trl N (PID 2003220240002) The applicant is proposing a five-megawatt facility that will occupy the majority of a 72.4 acre property. The property is partially located in the shoreland overlay that extends from Big Marine Lake, however the applicant has not proposed any solar equipment in the shoreland area. The application is scheduled for the October 7, 2025, Planning Commission meeting. Please provide any comments by September 30, 2025, to be included in the staff report for the Planning Commission. Staff anticipates the item being on the October 21, 2025, City Council meeting. Thank you, TJ Hofer (he/him/his) Planner II Bolton & Menk, Inc. 3507 High Point Drive North Bldg. 1 - Suite E130, Oakdale, Minnesota, 55128 (651) 506-7474 (612) 271-6984 tj.hofer@bolton-menk.com www.Bolton-Menk.com Book time to meet with me 14727 209 th St. N., Scandia, Minnesota 55073 Phone (651) 433 -2274 Fax (651) 433 -5112 http://www.cityofscandia.com October 8, 2025 Brenda Eklund City Clerk 14727 209th Street N Scandia, MN 55073 RE: Barr Distribution SES CUP Review Dear Ms. Eklund, We have completed our review of the submittals for Scandia Plaza Expansion received September 16, 2025, from the project representatives. The following submitted documents were reviewed: • Plan Set – Barr 1 CSG, dated August 29, 2025, containing (16) plans sheets: o Title Sheet, Existing Conditions, Site Plan, Stormwater Management, Landscaping Plan, Topography Detail, Seeding Detail, and Traffic Plan. We provide the following comments for the proposed improvements: Sheet T1: 1. No grading plan is included in this submission. A grading plan should be created/submitted for further review. 2. No erosion control plan is included in this submission. An erosion control plan should be created/submitted for further review. Sheet PV2: 3. A City right of way permit and driveway application will be required to connect to Mayberry Trail N. 4. Provide dimensions for driveway access and turnarounds. 5. Will storm sewer infrastructure be needed within the stormwater treatment facilities? Sheet PV5: 6. Stormwater BMP’s should be reviewed and approved by CMSCWD as part of their permitting on this project. Filter media, subdrainage, treatment volume, and seeding may require revisions. 7. Additional detail regarding the stormwater BMP layout, location, and grading is required to complete this review. 14727 209 th St. N., Scandia, Minnesota 55073 Phone (651) 433 -2274 Fax (651) 433 -5112 http://www.cityofscandia.com Sheet PV12: 8. What signage will be placed on Mayberry Trail N during the construction of the driveway access on this property? Landscaping Plan 9. The landscaping plan is currently under review by the City Planner. Stormwater and Drainage Design Comments 10. Assess the proposed site plan in relation to the water quality volume requirements of the NPDES permit. Refer to the Minnesota Stormwater Manual for volume control calculations for solar panel projects. (https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Stormwater_management_for_solar_proj ects_and_determining_compliance_with_the_NPDES_construction_stormwater_permit) General Comments 1. This project will be responsible for development fees/permits as required by the City and Watershed District (CMSCWD). 2. Plans for the building and all site work shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Labor and Industry prior to construction if required. Submit approval to the City. 3. Developer shall provide proof of MPCA NPDES/SDS construction stormwater permit approval prior to construction. 4. Any new exterior lighting must be reviewed by staff and meet the standards established in the Unified Development Code. 5. After final restoration and turf establishment reaches 70% coverage applicant shall request final inspection through the City of Scandia. 6. Revised documents shall be submitted for review and acceptance prior to any construction activity starting. 7. Please respond in writing as to how the above comments will be addressed. 8. All construction activity and material storage shall be contained within the site. 9. Street sweeping will be required within 24 hours if sediment is tracked off the site. 10. A Gopher State One Call shall be completed before any excavation work can begin as noted on the plans. 11. All construction shall be completed within City approved working hours. 12. A preconstruction meeting is required to be held prior to any construction activity starting on site. The Owner shall invite representatives from the City, Watershed and the private utility owners as noted on the plans. 13. Site improvements shall be coordinated with private utility owners and private utility work will be the responsibility of the applicant. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 651-308-1491 with any questions or comments you may have regarding this memo. Sincerely, Isiah Bubany, P.E. Project Engineer 1 | P a g e Date of Meeting: October 7, 2025 To: Chair Loeffler and Members of the Planning Commission From: T.J. Hofer, Consultant City Planner Re: Conditional Use Permits for Distribution Solar Energy Systems at 11522 Mayberry Trail North Applicant: Jesse Dimond, MN CSG 2019-69 LLC; New Energy Equity, LLC Zoning: AG-C, SM-O, SES-O Owner: Dean D Barr Trust Future Land Use: Agricultural Core Location: PID: 2003220240002 11522 Mayberry Trail North Review Deadline November 15, 2025 The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for a Distribution Solar Energy Systems (DSES) on the parcel located at 11522 Mayberry Trail North (subject property). BACKGROUND The subject property is approximately 72.4 acres and abuts mayberry Trail North. The property is zoned Agricultural Core (AG-C) and is within the Shoreland Overlay Management District (SM-O) and the Solar Energy System Overlay District (SES-O). The property currently is used for agriculture and a single-family dwelling is located on the property. The shoreland overlay extends from a Big Marine Lake to the southeast and an unnamed basin to the east. DSES are allowed through a CUP in areas where the SES-O allows. The DSES use has a large number of conditions that must be met which are detailed later in the staff report. The SES-O is not a traditional zoning district that is mapped but 2 | P a g e instead establishes standards where it applies based primarily on setback from roads and proximity to protected waterbodies. The UDC states that DSES uses are exempt from the Residential and Agricultural Accessory Structure standards regarding the square footage and number of structures permitted on a parcel but must comply with the setback and lot coverage standards established in Section [153.200.030]. The applicant initially submitted the application on June 3, 2025, and the application was deemed incomplete. One submittal that was missing was the Woodland Preservation Plan. The applicant requested to be heard before the City Council to discuss the submittal requirement and the existing woodlands on the site. The request was heard at the City Council on July 15, 2025, at their regularly scheduled meeting. The report to the Council is attached. The Council directed the applicant proceed in compliance with the current standards for Woodland Preservation Plan, asked staff to evaluate what changes to the ordinance may be reasonable to allow required plantings, like screening, to be counted towards replacement trees for the woodland preservation replacement requirements, and indicated that significant trees should be used in preparation of the Woodland Preservation Plan. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposed Conditions The applicant is proposed to develop the 72.4 acre parcel with a five megawatt DSES use. A new access is proposed that will serve the DSES use. 3 | P a g e A total of six poles are proposed on the site, with two poles being located in the 500 ft. setback from the street. Overhead wires are proposed from the street north along the proposed access approximately 582 ft. The vegetation within the DSES will largely be cleared and is marked on the site plan. Screening is proposed through a fence with a scenic canvas and two rows of coniferous trees along the southern boundary of the DSES use. Site Plan Review Lot Standards The subject property meets the dimensional standards established in the UDC and no changes are proposed to the lot. Utilities The dwelling on the site is served by private well and septic. The proposed use of the site will not require additional water or sewer services. Streets, Access, and Parking The UDC does not include a minimum number of parking spaces to be provided for DSES uses. Uses not defined are determined by the Zoning Administrator. The three proposed turnoff/parking spaces should be sufficient parking for the proposed use. Landscaping and Screening The use specific standards for the site direct plantings on the site, however, the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant proposes trees between one to four inches. The UDC requires plantings of conifers to be a minimum of 4 ft. in height in Table 153.400.060-2. All trees planted on the site must comply with the standards in Table 153.400.060-2. A condition has been included that before a building permit may be issued, the landscaping plan shall be revised. 4 | P a g e Woodland and Tree Preservation The application triggers the requirements for a Woodland and Tree Preservation plan. The applicant has submitted a Tree Preservation Plan, prepared by a landscape architect, that show that the trees to be removed on the site are all blue spruce trees and one pine tree, resulting in the removal of 116,000 sq. ft. of vegetation. Replacement is required for significant trees and significant woodlands. These terms are defined within the UDC as (emphasis added): Significant Tree: A healthy tree measuring a minimum of 6 caliper inches in diameter or greater (as measured 54 inches above the ground) for all primary deciduous trees, a minimum of 20 caliper inches in diameter or greater for all secondary deciduous trees, or a minimum of 12 feet in height for all native coniferous trees. Significant Woodland: a treed area of at least 15,000 square feet or more which includes significant trees. 5 | P a g e The applicant has stated that the tree rows being removed include no native trees, and therefore no significant trees. If no significant trees or woodlands are removed, no restoration is required. Use Specific Performance Standards Staff have prepared a matrix that summarizes how the application meets or does not meet the use specific standards for DSES. This matrix is attached and highlights four standards where conflicts with the standards are identified. Below the standards for the CUP are reviewed. Where staff have found issues with the submittal, staff have noted this and has included conditions to address the issues. Conditional Use Permit – Sunvest DSES Chapter 153.500.060 Subd. 1(C)(I) of the UDC lists the general standards to meet to grant a CUP or IUP. Below these standards are repeated in italics, with the staff’s findings following: 1. The proposed use will be in compliance with and shall not have a negative effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan include promoting the use of renewable energy systems on housing and in areas where such systems can be safely operated and produce a minimum level of visual impact. The DSES is allowed through a Conditional Use Permit within the SES-O district and helps obtain the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff have included conditions to address the conditions established within the UDC. 2. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the proposed use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort. The DSES will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. Reasonable conditions of approval can be added if the Planning Commission finds issues with the proposed SES. 3. The proposed use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values or scenic views. The DSES use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values or scenic views. Screening for roadways and nearby dwellings is required as a condition of approval. The proposed system meets setbacks as required within the UDC. 6 | P a g e 4. The establishment of the proposed use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. The proposed DSES will not impede development or improvement of surrounding properties. 5. Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to accommodate the use which is proposed. The proposed DSES use is not anticipated to substantially increase use, cause undue wear, or cause any detriment that is atypical from regular use. 6. The proposed use shall conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located and all other applicable standards of this Chapter. The proposed use is consistent with the applicable regulations of the AG-C District but is inconsistent with the requirements of the UDC. Any significant changes to the DSES will be required to conform with the applicable regulations of the district and the Conditional Use Permit must be amended to allow for the change. Reasonable conditions of approval can be added if the Planning Commission finds issues with the proposed use. Staff have identified the following issues to be addressed: Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) II. Permit Application f. Within the setback or any adjoining parcels owned by the landowner, utility poles shall be limited to one interconnection pole, for the solar array system. Additional poles required must meet all required setbacks. The proposed placement of all utility poles, ground equipment, and any proposed aerially mounted equipment must be shown in any proposed plans submitted. The setback on the property is 500 ft. from the centerline of Mayberry. The applicant is proposing an interconnection pole in the right-of- way (in line with the existing overhead wires), one pole approximately 241 ft. on to the lot (from ROW) that is unlabeled, and four poles at or beyond the 500 ft. required setback. Both poles within the setback are labeled "Xcel Poles." Based on how the standard is written, poles within the right-of-way have been historically not counted towards the total number of poles within the setback area. 7 | P a g e IV. Performance Standards. h. The visual screen must fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels during leaf- on and leaf-off conditions. The proposed screening appears to mostly obscure the solar panels. There is a path through existing wood south of the proposed solar farm and north of the existing residence that the DSES may be visible through. Staff have included a condition that the screening be maintained in perpetuity unless the array is fully decommissioned and returned to a natural state. The Planning Commission may require the apparent gap to be filled with vegetation for screening. s. Power and communication lines that are not defined in this ordinance as Essential Services and running between banks of solar panels and the interconnection pole or other point of interconnection must be buried underground. Exemptions may be granted by the City in instances where shallow bedrock, water courses or other elements of the natural landscape interfere with the ability to bury lines, or the distance to a substation or other point of interconnection reasonably precludes burial. The proposal is showing approximately 582 ft. of overhead lines originating at the right-of-way and being buried on the site. Staff have included a condition that power and communication lines must be buried in accordance with this condition. The interconnection pole is the southern most pole on the site. The Planning Commission should discuss the standard. 8 | P a g e t. All DSES facilities must be designed and located in order to prevent reflective glare toward any inhabited buildings on adjacent properties, as well as adjacent street rights-of-way. Steps to control glare nuisance may include selective placement of the system, screening on the side of the solar array facing the reflectors, reducing use of the reflector system, or other remedies that limit glare. DSES utilizing a reflector system must conduct a glare study to identify the impacts of the system on occupied buildings and transportation rights-of-way within a half mile of the project boundary. The glare study must also address aviation impacts. The glare analysis submitted by the applicant shows that there is a chance for significant glare to the north, however, the glare analysis does not account for offsite screening. Staff have included a condition that if glare is reported as a nuisance that the staff will review the existing conditions and the applicant must address any concerns identified by staff. 7. The proposed use complies with the general and specific performance standards as specified by this Section and this Chapter. 9 | P a g e The Conditional Use Permit conflicts with a number of the specific performance standards established in Section 153.300.030 (BB), that must be addressed. Staff have included conditions where the application does not meet these standards. ANALYSIS Review Comments The submittal was sent to city staff and other regulatory agencies for review and comment. Fire Department The Fire Chief had no comment. Engineering Department The City Engineer has provided a comment letter which is attached. Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District At the time of writing this staff report, the CMSCWD had not provided any comments. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources At the time of writing this staff report, the DNR had not provided any comments. Public Works Department The Public Works Director had no comment. Staff Analysis Staff finds that the proposed plan is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and UDC, however, aspects of the proposal are inconsistent and staff believe these elements should be discussed by the Planning Commission. These issues are 1. Location of poles within the setback area. 2. Proposed screening and apparent gap. 3. Overhead wires within the setback area between the interconnection pole and other poles on the site. 4. The glare analysis and impact on Highway 97. Staff have included conditions in the approvals to address issues where they have been identified. 10 | P a g e COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission can do one of the following: 1. Recommend approval, with or without conditions, of the attached ordinance and resolutions. 2. Recommend denial, with findings, of the attached ordinance and resolutions. 3. Table the request for further review/study. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive any public comment that may be offered. With the existing conflicts with the standards in the UDC, staff is not able to recommend the Planning Commission recommend approval. Staff recommends the Planning Commission discuss the proposal and the issues identified within the staff report. If the Planning Commission has additional questions, would like additional input from staff or consultants, or would like to request a revision, the may table the request. If the Planning Commission concurs with the applicant on how to apply the standards, the Planning Commission may recommend approval with findings. In the event the Commission wishes to recommend approval, the following conditions are recommended: 1. The project shall be in substantial compliance with the plans reviewed and approved with this request, with the exception of where revisions are required with this approval. 2. Treatment of stormwater runoff should be consistent with MPCA storm water manual guidance for solar projects. 3. Facility location and design must minimize impact on habitat and wildlife movement. 4. Before a building permit can be issued on the site the following must occur: a. The applicant must complete an interconnection agreement with a local utility and provide a copy of the agreement to the City. The system operator must provide a visible external disconnect if required by the utility. b. The City will require the establishment of an escrow account, from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota, to ensure vegetation is installed and establishes itself as identified in the approved permit, based on an estimated cost for plantings and labor provided by the applicant. The planting and screening plan must utilize the recommended plant types described in Section [153.400.060] and must be approved by the City. c. The City will require the posting of a bond, letter of credit or the establishment of an escrow account to ensure decommissioning. The decommissioning plan must provide a letter of credit that does not give credit towards salvage material. The guarantee shall be from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota. 11 | P a g e d. The applicant must submit proof that a current general liability policy covering bodily injury and property damage with limits of at least $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate or the maximum liability thresholds set forth Minnesota Statutes, section 466.04, as amended, whichever is greater, to the City. e. The screening shall fully obscure 100% view of the solar panel area from any adjacent road right-of-way immediately upon screen completion in accordance with this section, and shall be completed prior to the remainder of solar facilities and panel installation. Effectiveness of screening shall be reviewed and approved by city staff prior to continuation of project installation. f. A MPCA General Stormwater Permit will be required. g. The applicant must demonstrate how a backhoe would be able to access all proposed stormwater facilities in the future to perform maintenance. h. Submitted plans must be revised to be consistent with the conditions in this approval, including but not limited to: i. Proposed plantings shall, at minimum, meet the standards established in Table 153.400.060-2. ii. Power and communication lines that are not defined in this the UDC as Essential Services and running between banks of solar panels and the interconnection pole or other point of interconnection must be buried underground. iii. A grading plan and erosion control plan shall be submitted and meet the standards in the UDC and be approved by the City Engineer. 5. If any concrete is used onsite for construction, all wash outs from cement trucks shall not be dumped on site. 6. If any canvas becomes damaged or fades to point it no longer camouflages prior to the completion of the compliance period to establish vegetative cover, said canvas must be replaced with 60 days of notice to the landowner and owner of the Distribution SES. 7. The required screening must be achieved within six growing seasons from the date of project approval. If the screening is not established within 6 growing seasons, it must be implemented through the planting of mature vegetation to fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels as described in current ordinance. 8. The applicant shall maintain landscaping and screening for the full term of the permit up to the site being decommissioned. The City may enter and inspect the property, outside the area protected around the array by fencing, at any reasonable time for the purpose of investigating a reported violation or to ascertain compliance or noncompliance with the current standards or approvals regulating screening. 9. The City reserves the right to utilize the vegetative escrow required with the permit to address noncompliance with approved screening if the applicant or operator does not bring the site into compliance within nine months. 10. If glare is reported as a nuisance staff will review the existing conditions and the applicant must address any concerns identified by staff to bring the use into compliance with the current regulations. 11. No lighting is proposed or approved with this approval. 12 | P a g e 12. The first 50 ft. of the access road off of MN 97 shall be either bituminous or concrete to prevent tracking sediment onto MN 97. 13. The applicant shall stake the required setback from Mayberry Trail North so that the Building Inspector can verify the setbacks before construction begins. 14. Signage must be installed that clearly identifies the array and emergency contacts that are responsible in the case of an emergency within three months of a final building permit being issued. Signage must be screened from public right of way and residential uses within 350 ft. 15. Signs, informational, or visual communication devices shall comply with applicable regulations. 16. All plans submitted for building permit approval shall be prepared by a licensed, professional engineer. 17. Any expansion of the DSES shall require an amended conditional use permit. 18. The applicant shall complete a Developer Agreement with the City. The Agreement shall include financial guarantees acceptable to the City), to assure compliance with the Vegetative Escrow, Landscaping Plan, and Decommissioning Plan. The Development Agreement shall be signed by the City and the applicant before the City approves the final permit for the solar installation. 19. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits prior to work on the site, including but not limited to: a. The Distribution Scale Solar Energy System shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulatory standards, including the current Uniform Building Code, the National Electric Code, the State Plumbing Code and the Minnesota Energy Code. b. Driveway access permits from the City of Scandia shall be secured for the access drives before the City approves the final permit for the solar installation. c. The applicant shall obtain the required Watershed District permit(s). d. The applicant shall obtain the required grading and erosion control permit from the City. e. The applicant shall obtain the required building permit from the City. 20. The applicant shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal permits and requirements for the new development on the parcel. 21. The City may revoke the Conditional Use Permit for the site if the site is not in compliance with any condition of this approval and if all permits and required work to comply with approvals from other local, state, and federal permits is not completed. 22. The applicant/operator of the DSES shall pay all costs incurred by the city to monitor compliance with conditions of the Conditional Use Permit 23. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application. Attachments A. Review Matrix prepared by T.J. Hofer, Consultant City Planner B. Draft Resolution 10-21-25-XX Conditional Use Permit 13 | P a g e C. Location and Zoning Map D. Application E. Narrative F. Submitted Plans 1. Barr 1 - CUP - Stamped Pages 2. Barr 1 - CUP - Non-Stamped Pages 3. Barr 1 - CUP - Grading and Storm Water Pages 4. Vertical Sketch Elevation Sims 9.9.25 5. Barr 1 - Decom Plan - 8.29.25 6. Glare Analysis 5.6.25 - Barr 1 7. 2025.07.07 - Barr I Solar – SURVEY 8. Emergency Response Plan 4-22-24 – Aholt 9. Site Rules 10. About Us 11. MN CSG 2019-69 (Barr 1) LLC_L2 Wetland Delineation_Report_Final 12. Barr 1 - Tree Preservation Plan Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions (BB) Solar Energy System – Distribution Scale (Distribution SES). As a principal use, a Distribution SES is permitted to the extent that it is the primary use on a property and operates to distribute energy to predominantly off -site users. Such system must comply with the following requirements: I. Districts and Size Limits a. Within the SES-O Overlay District, Distribution SES are limited as a Conditional Use in the AG-C, R-C, and I-P zoning districts. – b. Distribution SES are prohibited in the following areas: i. Within the Lower St. Croix River Overlay District, within the Shoreland Management Overlay District as it applies to Recreational Development Lakes, the Floodplain Overlay Districts, and the shoreland areas of Falls Creek. The proposed solar array is located outside of the SM-O, but improvements such as fencing and impervious surfaces are proposed within the SM-O. ii. Within wetlands to the extent required by the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act, and within associated wetland setback areas as designated by the City of Scandia. iii. All Base Zoning Districts not identified in Chapter 153.300.030 Subd. 1 (BB) I.a. iv. Within any setbacks or buffer areas established within the Base Zoning District or applicable Overlay District. c. Distribution SES, within the Shoreland Management Overlay District, must also meet the following: The proposed solar array is located outside of the SM-O, but improvements such as fencing and impervious surfaces are proposed within the SM-O. i. The site is within the shoreland of a Natural Environment Lake and all parcels adjacent to the Natural Environment Lake are zoned AG-C. ii. No intensive vegetation clearing shall be allowed. iii. No placement of structures and facilities on slopes over 12%. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions iv. Treatment of stormwater runoff should be consistent with MPCA storm water manual guidance for solar projects. v. Native vegetation must be planted on the site wherever practical to provide habitat. vi. Best management practices for managing erosion control are utilized. vii. Facility location and design must demonstrate that the facility will minimize impact on habitat and wildlife movement. Compliance with these standards must be shown on submitted plans. – d. Distribution SES uses are exempt from the Residential and Agricultural Accessory Structure standards regarding the square footage and number of structures permitted on a parcel, but must comply with the setback and lot coverage standards established in Section [153.200.030]. – II. Permit Application a. Existing Site Plans Required. The applicant for a Distribution SES must submit a detailed site plan of existing conditions, showing site boundaries; existing access roads, driveways, and easements; existing structures; setbacks; surface water drainage patterns, floodplains, Shoreland districts, delineated wetlands, toe and top of bluffs, ordinary high water mark and other protected natural resources; existing vegetation, soil types, topography (2- foot contour intervals), and all other items required in Section – Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions [153.500.050 and 153.500.060] for Conditional/Interim Use Permit applications or by the City. The Existing Site Plan must be at a graphic scale not less than 1:100. b. Proposed Site Plan Required. The applicant must submit a site plan of proposed conditions, including the proposed number, location and spacing of solar panels; proposed height of panels; location of access roads; planned location of underground or overhead electric lines connecting the solar farm to the building, substation or other electric load; new electrical equipment other than at the existing building or substation that is the connection point for the solar farm; proposed stormwater management facilities; proposed erosion and sediment control measures, and other information as required by the City. The Proposed Site Plan must be at a graphic scale not less than 1:100. – c. The application must include two vertical sketch elevations of the premises accurately drawn to a scale identified on the drawing, depicting the proposed solar energy conversion system and its relationship to the surrounding topography and public roadways. The sketches must depict the proposed system’s relationship to structures on adjacent lots as viewed from six (6) feet above ground level at the residential structure wall that site closest to the solar installation, one sketch showing the view without screening and the other sketch showing the view with proposed permanent screening. The sketch elevations must include a graphic scale not less than 1:50, or as needed to clearly show the vertical relationship between the proposed solar facilities and structures on adjacent lots. The applicant has submitted the sketch elevations and Staff have found them consistent with the requirements for screening. d. Use of Public Roads. The applicant must obtain all necessary approvals from the appropriate road authority for site access and driveways. Access will be provided off of Mayberry Trail North. Mayberry is a local road and the city is responsible for Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions reviewing access permits. An access permit will be required with the building permit submittal. e. Interconnection Agreement. The applicant must complete an interconnection agreement with a local utility and provide a copy of the agreement to the City before approval of electrical, building, or other required permits. The system operator must provide a visible external disconnect if required by the utility. The applicant is currently waiting for Xcel to complete a study estimated to be completed in the fall or winter of 2025. Staff have included a condition that before a building permit may be issued, the interconnection agreement be completed and documentation showing the interconnection agreement must be submitted to the city. f. Within the setback or any adjoining parcels owned by the landowner, utility poles shall be limited to one interconnection pole, for the solar array system. Additional poles required must meet all required setbacks. The proposed placement of all utility poles, ground equipment, and any proposed aerially mounted equipment must be shown in any proposed plans submitted. The setback on the property is 500 ft. from the centerline of Mayberry. The applicant is proposing an interconnection pole in the right-of-way (in line with the existing overhead wires), one pole approximately 241 ft. on to the lot (from ROW) that is unlabeled, and four poles at or beyond the 500 ft. required setback. Both poles within the setback are labeled "Xcel Poles." Based on how the standard is written, poles within the right- of-way have been historically not counted towards the total number of poles within the setback area. III. Development Agreement, Financial Guarantees, and Insurance. a. Conditional Use Permit. In addition to any other lawful conditions, the City also reserves option in imposing a development agreement in regards to the Distribution SES operation including repair, maintenance, and replacement and addressing all requirements set forth in Chapter 153.300.030 Subd. 1 (BB) Solar Energy System – Distribution Scale (Distribution SES). If the City elects to impose a development agreement, the development agreement must be executed before a A development agreement will be required. Staff have included a condition that before a building permit may be issued, a development agreement must be established between the applicant and the city. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions building permit can be issued and must be recorded against the property. b. Vegetative Escrow. The City will require the establishment of an escrow account, from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota, to ensure vegetation is installed and establishes itself as identified in the approved permit, based on an estimated cost for plantings and labor provided by the applicant. The planting and screening plan must utilize the recommended plant types described in Section [153.400.060] and must be approved by the City. Staff have included a condition that before a building permit may be issued, a vegetative escrow be submitted and approved. c. Decommissioning Plan. The applicant must submit a decommissioning plan to ensure that facilities are properly removed after their useful life. If the Distribution SES remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of one year, the system shall be deemed to be abandoned and will constitute a public nuisance. The plan must include provisions for removal of all structures and foundations, restoration of soil and vegetation, and a plan ensuring financial resources will be available to fully decommission the site. The City will require the posting of a bond, letter of credit or the establishment of an escrow account to ensure decommissioning. The guarantee shall be from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota. A decommissioning plan is included in the submittal. Staff have noted that salvage value should not be used to reduce the letter of credit. Staff have included a condition that before a building permit may be issued, the applicant must submit a bond, letter of credit, or the establishment of an escrow account for decommissioning. d. Payment In Lieu of Taxes. Notwithstanding that Minnesota Statutes Section 272.02, Subdivision 24 (or its successor) classifies real property upon which a solar energy generating system is located that is used primarily for solar energy production (subject to the production tax under Minnesota Statutes Section 272.0295) as class 3a, the City may require the applicant to enter into a Payment In Lieu of Taxes Agreement to The City does not believe that a Payment In Lieu of Taxes Agreement is needed as the land would likely remain agricultural if not developed for Distribution SES Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions compensate the City for any prospective tax revenue that may be lost due to such reclassification. e. Liability Insurance. The applicant must maintain a current general liability policy covering bodily injury and property damage with limits of at least $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate or the maximum liability thresholds set forth Minnesota Statutes, section 466.04, as amended, whichever is greater, and provide proof that it meets the insurance requirement to the City. The applicant has not provided proof of insurance at this time. Staff have included a condition that before a building permit may be issued, the applicant must submit the proof of insurance. IV. Performance Standards a. The limitations on the number or cumulative generating capacity of Distribution SES is regulated by Minnesota Statutes 216B.164 and related regulations. The proposed use is capable of generating five megawatts. Five megawatts is the maximum amount allowed. b. Distribution SES must comply with all applicable Local, State and Federal regulatory standards, including the State of Minnesota Uniform Building Code, as amended; the National Electric Code, as amended; the State Plumbing Code, as amended; and the Minnesota Energy Code, as amended. Staff have included a condition that the applicant comply with all applicable codes and regulations. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions c. If the proposed Distribution SES is adjacent to areas designed or formally protected from development by Local, State and Federal agencies as a wildlife management area, scenic byway, or National Wild and Scenic corridor, the applicant must implement mitigation measures to protect the resource values of the designated wildlife area or scenic corridor as a condition of approval. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, maintaining wildlife travel corridors, setting the development back from the right-of-way or stream corridor, using the natural topography to screen the project, and retaining or planting vegetation that would fully obscure the view of the energy project within the scenic corridor. The project is not adjacent to a wildlife management area, scenic byway, or National Wild and Scenic corridor. d. Setbacks. The City may require wider setbacks if it determines that the wider setbacks are warranted by the potential impacts to adjacent properties. The nearest solar panel of the Distribution SES must be setback a minimum of: The proposed setbacks comply with the required setbacks. Staff have included a condition that for a building permit to be issued, the site plan must be in substantial compliance with the proposed plan that were reviewed with this application. i. 75 feet from all parcel boundaries 79.08 ft. proposed. ii. 350 feet from existing residential structures on adjacent parcels existing at the time of the permit application 490 ft. proposed. iii. 800 feet from the centerline of minor arterial roadways or 500 feet from the centerline of all other public road rights-of-way. 501.06 ft. proposed. iv. The structure setback requirements from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) for that District if located in the Shoreland Overlay District. N/A e. Ground-mounted solar energy systems may not exceed fifteen feet (15’) in height when oriented at maximum tilt. Building- integrated solar energy systems when at maximum tilt may not The proposed SES does not exceed 15 ft. in height when oriented at maximum tilt. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions exceed the maximum height permitted in the Base Zoning District. f. All components of the Distribution SES must be screened by: Screening is proposed through a mixture of existing vegetation, landscaping, and fencing. i. Setbacks ii. Berming iii. Scenic canvas iv. Existing vegetation v. Terrain vi. Landscaping vii. A combination thereof. g. The solar array must be screened from view from: The proposed screening meets the screening requirements detailed within the UDC. Staff does not believe that greater screening is required based on the future land use guidance of surrounding parcels in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. i. Adjacent road right-of-way. ii. Dwellings within five hundred feet (500’) of any component of the solar array. iii. Public waterbodies, as viewed from six (6) feet above the ordinary high water level. iv. The City may require greater screening as needed based on development patterns within the City and the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions h. The visual screen must fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels during leaf-on and leaf-off conditions. The proposed screening appears to mostly obscure the solar panels. There is a path through existing wood south of the proposed solar farm and north of the existing residence that the DSES may be visible through. Staff have included a condition that the screening be maintained in perpetuity unless the array is fully decommissioned and returned to a natural state. The Planning Commission may require the apparent gap to be filled with vegetation for screening. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions i. The screening shall fully obscure 100% view of the solar panels from any adjacent road right-of-way immediately upon screen completion in accordance with this section, and shall be completed prior to the remainder of solar facilities and panel installation. Effectiveness of screening shall be reviewed and approved by city staff prior to continuation of project installation. The applicant is proposing to install a fence with scenic canvasing to meet the immediate screening standard. Staff have included a condition that the site shall be fully screened before construction of the site can begin. j. Permanent vegetative screening shall be designed to have a horizontal depth of at least twenty (20) feet. The applicant is proposing all vegetative screening with a depth of at least 20 ft. k. At least seventy (70) percent of the area of the vegetative buffer, as measured in square feet, must be composed of coniferous plantings interspersed throughout the screening. The rest of the vegetative buffer must be composed of densely branched trees and shrubs, as approved by the Zoning Administrator. A landscaping plan must be provided that shows screening elements, including the species of any vegetation used for screening. Screening on the south side of the site includes a 20 ft. wide mix of Norway pine, white pine, eastern red cedar, white spruce, and white cedar. Norway Pine 34 White Pine 30 Eastern Red Cedar 18 White Spruce 25 White Cedar 22 Total Trees 129 Total Coniferous 100% l. The required screening must be achieved within six (6) growing seasons from the date of project approval. If the screening is not established within 6 growing seasons, it must be implemented through the planting of mature vegetation to fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels as described in Chapter 153.300.030 Subd. 1 (BB) III.i. Staff have included a condition that if screening is not established within six growing seasons, the applicant must plant mature vegetation to fully obscure view of the solar panels. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions m. Table 153.300.030-4. Distribution SES Screening Summary - n. Any fences or barriers installed for the project must be mounted on wood posts, and may not include any chain link, barbed or razor wire. The fence may not exceed eight (8) feet in height from the ground, and must incorporate wildlife-friendly design with a gap at the bottom for passage of birds and small animals. The City will utilize recommendations from the Minnesota DNR to determine if the fence design is wildlife-friendly. The applicant has submitted details for a fence around the array that meets the requirement of the code. o. Scenic canvases. Temporary screening through the use of scenic canvases is only permissible if it has been approved as part of the project application or it is required as a permit condition. i. Scenic canvases may only be used to temporarily screen Distribution SES installations for a maximum of six (6) years. Vegetative screening is proposed to take the place of the scenic canvas after the growing period. ii. Applicants shall supply a visual representation of the appearance of the canvas for review by the City. The applicant has provided a visual sample of the proposed material. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions iii. If a canvas was not included as part of an original application but has been required as part of a conditional approval, then the applicant shall provide the City with a site plan and a visual sample of the canvas design based on the requirements of this section for the City's final approval. – iv. Scenic canvas shall be attached to fencing, and shall have a natural vegetation or scenic views printed on the entire outward facing portion of the canvas to match the existing surroundings and vegetative screening of the Distribution SES. The proposed scenic canvas has a vegetative print on the material. v. Canvases must be designed to accommodate wildlife movement. The applicant has indicated that the canvas will allow for wildlife movement. vi. Prohibitions. The following is prohibited from scenic canvases: – 1. Canvases that include visible messages or depict images other than what is required are not eligible for use as scenic canvas. – 2. Scenic canvases may not be used as a substitute for the implementation of vegetative screening or as a substitute for achieving the final required level of screening coverage within prescribed timeframes. – vii. Scenic canvasing must be removed once vegetative screening is established. – Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions viii. Damage and replacement of canvases. If any canvas becomes damaged or fades to point it no longer camouflages prior to the completion of the compliance period to establish vegetative cover, said canvas must be replaced with sixty (60) days of notice to the landowner and owner of the Distribution SES. Should the owner fail to comply with this requirement, the City may replace said canvas at the owner's full expense as prescribed under the developer's agreement. Staff have included a condition that the scenic canvas be maintained for the extent of the use of the canvas. p. Distribution SES are subject to stormwater management and erosion and sediment control best practices, including DNR guidelines on Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control, and NPDES permit requirements, and must obtain required permits from the MPCA, local Watershed District, City and others. Staff have included a condition that the applicant must obtain all required permits and follow best management practices regarding stormwater management. q. All ground areas under solar array installs that are not occupied by equipment or essential access paths, must be planted with a deep rooted, native grass and pollinator seed mix suitable to the soil and moisture conditions of the immediate area. Plant growth must be stable and self-supporting within one (1) growing seasons from the date of building permit approval. If approved, the City may allow agricultural pasture plantings under the array. If the agricultural pasture ceases, the ground area shall be planted as required with native grass and pollinator seed mix. The applicant has submitted a seeding plan that appears to meet the standards of the UDC. r. All plans submitted for Building Permit approval must be prepared by a licensed, professional engineer. - Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions s. Power and communication lines that are not defined in this ordinance as Essential Services and running between banks of solar panels and the interconnection pole or other point of interconnection must be buried underground. Exemptions may be granted by the City in instances where shallow bedrock, water courses or other elements of the natural landscape interfere with the ability to bury lines, or the distance to a substation or other point of interconnection reasonably precludes burial. The proposal is showing approximately 582 ft. of overhead lines originating at the right-of-way and being buried on the site. Staff have included a condition that power and communication lines must be buried in accordance with this condition. The interconnection pole is the southern most pole on the site. The Planning Commission should discuss the standard. Difficulties have arisen from reviewing this standard as Essential Services are defined by the ordinance as "Underground or overhead telephone, gas, electrical, steam, waste, or water transmission services, including necessary structures and accessories such as poles, wires, mains, drains, sewers, pipes, conduits, cables, fire alarm boxes, police call boxes, traffic signals, hydrants and other similar equipment. Essential Services shall not include Wireless Communication Antennas or Wind Energy Conversion Systems." Staff are unable to determine what is an Essential Service for Xcel as the expertise required for this is outside of the scope of city staff's review. t. All Distribution SES facilities must be designed and located in order to prevent reflective glare toward any inhabited buildings on adjacent properties, as well as adjacent street rights-of-way. Steps to control glare nuisance may include selective placement of the system, screening on the side of the solar array facing the reflectors, reducing use of the reflector system, or other remedies that limit glare. Distribution SES utilizing a reflector system must conduct a glare study to identify the impacts of the system on occupied buildings and transportation rights-of-way within a half mile of the project boundary. The glare study must also address aviation impacts. The applicant submitted a glare analysis. The glare analysis shows that glare to the north towards Highway 97 may create times when the glare would be intense enough to cause a visual after image. The glare analysis did not include an obstruction to the north where there is screening element located north of the DSES on the property to the north. Staff have included a condition that if glare is reported as a nuisance that the staff will review the existing conditions and the applicant must address any concerns identified by staff. Barr DSES CUP - Use Specific Performance Standards Review Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 153.300.030 (BB) Proposed Conditions u. The surface area of posts and related equipment for ground- mounted systems in combination with driveways, structures and other impervious surfaces on the parcel may not exceed the maximum lot coverage standard of the applicable Zoning District. Total impervious surface created from the proposed uses will be approximately 37,644.62 sq. ft. This equals a total of approximately 1.2% impervious surface on the lot. v. If lighting is provided at the project, lighting must be shielded and downcast such that the light does not spill onto adjacent properties. No lighting is proposed for the use. w. If the Distribution SES remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of one year, the system shall be deemed to be abandoned and will constitute a public nuisance. The owner must remove the abandoned system at their expense after obtaining a demolition permit. Removal includes the entire structure including transmission equipment. Staff have included a condition that allows the City to act on this requirement. CITY OF SCANDIA, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 10-21-25-XX APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DISTRIBUTION SCALE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM LOCATED ON 20.032.20.24.0002 LOCATED AT 11522 MAYBERRY TRAIL NORTH WHEREAS, Jesse Dimond, MN CSG 2019-69 LLC; New Energy Equity, LLC (the “applicant” or the “operator”), on behalf of Dean D Barr Trust (the “owner”), made an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a Distribution Solar Energy System (SES) to be located at PID 20.032.20.24.0002 located at 11522 Mayberry Trail North: THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT THREE (3), EXCEPT THE NORTH 151 FEET, IN SECTION TWENTY (20), TOWNSHIP THIRTY-TWO (32), RANGE TWENTY (20), LYING NORTH AND WEST OF THE TOWNSHIP ROAD PRESENTLY RUNNING OVER AND ACROSS SAID TRACT, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA. AND THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 32 NORTH, RANGE 20 WEST, WASHINGTON COUNTY, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 483.50 FEET OF THE SOUTH 587.0 FEET THEREOF , WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request for the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) at a duly noticed Public Hearing on October 7, 2025, and recommended that the City Council approve the CUP, with conditions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SCANDIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it approves of a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a Distribution SES, located at 10929 Scandia Trail North, based on the following findings: TO BE DETERMINED FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval shall be met: 1. The project shall be in substantial compliance with the plans reviewed and approved with this request, with the exception of where revisions are required with this approval. 2. Treatment of stormwater runoff should be consistent with MPCA storm water manual guidance for solar projects. 3. Facility location and design must minimize impact on habitat and wildlife movement. 4. Before a building permit can be issued on the site the following must occur: a. The applicant must complete an interconnection agreement with a local utility and provide a copy of the agreement to the City. The system operator must provide a visible external disconnect if required by the utility. b. The City will require the establishment of an escrow account, from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota, to ensure vegetation is installed and establishes itself as identified in the approved permit, based on an estimated cost for plantings and labor provided by the applicant. The planting and screening plan must utilize the recommended plant types described in Section [153.400.060] and must be approved by the City. c. The City will require the posting of a bond, letter of credit or the establishment of an escrow account to ensure decommissioning. The decommissioning plan must provide a letter of credit that does not give credit towards salvage material. The guarantee shall be from a creditable banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota. d. The applicant must submit proof that a current general liability policy covering bodily injury and property damage with limits of at least $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate or the maximum liability thresholds set forth Minnesota Statutes, section 466.04, as amended, whichever is greater, to the City. e. The screening shall fully obscure 100% view of the solar panel area from any adjacent road right-of-way immediately upon screen completion in accordance with this section, and shall be completed prior to the remainder of solar facilities and panel installation. Effectiveness of screening shall be reviewed and approved by city staff prior to continuation of project installation. f. A MPCA General Stormwater Permit will be required. g. The applicant must demonstrate how a backhoe would be able to access all proposed stormwater facilities in the future to perform maintenance. h. Submitted plans must be revised to be consistent with the conditions in this approval, including but not limited to: i. Proposed plantings shall, at minimum, meet the standards established in Table 153.400.060-2. ii. Power and communication lines that are not defined in this the UDC as Essential Services and running between banks of solar panels and the interconnection pole or other point of interconnection must be buried underground. iii. A grading plan and erosion control plan shall be submitted and meet the standards in the UDC and be approved by the City Engineer. 5. If any concrete is used onsite for construction, all wash outs from cement trucks shall not be dumped on site. 6. If any canvas becomes damaged or fades to point it no longer camouflages prior to the completion of the compliance period to establish vegetative cover, said canvas must be replaced with 60 days of notice to the landowner and owner of the Distribution SES. 7. The required screening must be achieved within six growing seasons from the date of project approval. If the screening is not established within 6 growing seasons, it must be implemented through the planting of mature vegetation to fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels as described in current ordinance. 8. The applicant shall maintain landscaping and screening for the full term of the permit up to the site being decommissioned. The City may enter and inspect the property, outside the area protected around the array by fencing, at any reasonable time for the purpose of investigating a reported violation or to ascertain compliance or noncompliance with the current standards or approvals regulating screening. 9. The City reserves the right to utilize the vegetative escrow required with the permit to address noncompliance with approved screening if the applicant or operator does not bring the site into compliance within nine months. 10. If glare is reported as a nuisance staff will review the existing conditions and the applicant must address any concerns identified by staff to bring the use into compliance with the current regulations. 11. No lighting is proposed or approved with this approval. 12. The first 50 ft. of the access road off of MN 97 shall be either bituminous or concrete to prevent tracking sediment onto MN 97. 13. The applicant shall stake the required setback from Mayberry Trail North so that the Building Inspector can verify the setbacks before construction begins. 14. Signage must be installed that clearly identifies the array and emergency contacts that are responsible in the case of an emergency within three months of a final building permit being issued. Signage must be screened from public right of way and residential uses within 350 ft. 15. Signs, informational, or visual communication devices shall comply with applicable regulations. 16. All plans submitted for building permit approval shall be prepared by a licensed, professional engineer. 17. Any expansion of the DSES shall require an amended conditional use permit. 18. The applicant shall complete a Developer Agreement with the City. The Agreement shall include financial guarantees acceptable to the City), to assure compliance with the Vegetative Escrow, Landscaping Plan, and Decommissioning Plan. The Development Agreement shall be signed by the City and the applicant before the City approves the final permit for the solar installation. 19. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits prior to work on the site, including but not limited to: a. The Distribution Scale Solar Energy System shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulatory standards, including the current Uniform Building Code, the National Electric Code, the State Plumbing Code and the Minnesota Energy Code. b. Driveway access permits from the City of Scandia shall be secured for the access drives before the City approves the final permit for the solar installation. c. The applicant shall obtain the required Watershed District permit(s). d. The applicant shall obtain the required grading and erosion control permit from the City. e. The applicant shall obtain the required building permit from the City. 20. The applicant shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal permits and requirements for the new development on the parcel. 21. The City may revoke the Conditional Use Permit for the site if the site is not in compliance with any condition of this approval and if all permits and required work to comply with approvals from other local, state, and federal permits is not completed. 22. The applicant/operator of the DSES shall pay all costs incurred by the city to monitor compliance with conditions of the Conditional Use Permit 23. The applicant shall pay all fees and escrows associated with this application. Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this __ day of ________ 2025. Steve Kronmiller, Mayor Jesse Dimond, Applicant ___________________, Owner ATTEST: Kyle Morell, City Administrator 6, 01 8.7 Legend Barr DSES CUP Location and Zoning Map 0 4,213 Feet This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This drawing is a compilation of records, information, and data located in various city, county, and state offices, and other sources affecting the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Scandia is not responsible for any inaccuracies herein contained. Disclaimer: © Bolton & Menk, Inc - Web GIS 10/3/2025 9:11 AM Roads US Trunk Highway Minnesota Trunk Highway County Highway Local Roads Ramp City Limits Parks Shoreland Overlay PUD Overlay Lakes Mining Overlay Saint Croix River District Zoning Agricultural Core Agricultural Preserves Rural Residential General Village Neighborhood Rural Commercial Rural Residential Neighborhood Village Historic Core Village Center Open Space - Planned Unit Development Industrial Park File No._____________ APPLICATION FOR PLANNING AND ZONING REQUEST City of Scandia, Minnesota 14727 209th Street North, Scandia, MN 55073 Phone 651/433-2274 Fax 651/433-5112 Web https://www.cityofscandia.com/ Please read before completing: The City will not begin processing an application that is incomplete. Detailed submission requirements may be found in the Scandia Development Code, available at the City office and website www.cityofscandia.com) and in the checklist forms for the particular type of application. Application fees are due at the time of application and are n ot refundable. 1. Property Location: (street address, if applicable) 2. Washington County Parcel ID: 3. Complete Legal Description: (attach if necessary) 4. Owner(s):Phone: (h) (b) Street Address: E-Mail: City/ State: Zip: 5. Applicant/Contact Person:Phone: (h) (b) Street Address (Mailing): E-Mail: City/ State: Zip: 6.Requested Action(s): (check all that apply) ____ Variance ____ Variance Extension ____ Conditional Use Permit (CUP) ____ CUP Extension ____ CUP/ Open Space Subdivision. ____ CUP/ Planned Unit Development ____ Interim Use Permit (IUP) ____ Annual Operators Permit ____ Administrative Permit (type)____________________ ____ Site Plan Review (type)____________________ ____ Site Plan Modification ____ Site Plan Extension ____ Sign (Permanent) ____ Amendment (Development Code ) ____ Amendment (Comp. Plan ) ____ Subdivision, Minor ____ Subdivision, Preliminary Plat/Major ____ Subdivision, Final Plat ____ Environmental Review ____ Wetland Review 20-032-20-24-0002 11522 MAYBERRY TR N MARINE ON ST CROIX, MN 55047 See attached Warranty Deed MN CSG 2019-69 LLC, a subsidiary of New Energy Equity, LLC 2530 Riva Rd Suite 200 Annapolis, MD 21401 Developer: Jesse Dimond X Justin Barr 11522 Mayberry Trail N MARINE ON ST CROIX, MN 55047 Docusign Envelope ID: 97EBB5D9-EF8D-4AC2-B9EE-CB2B15DFF5E5 7. Brief Description of Request: (attach separate sheet if necessary; include Variance Rationale if necessary) _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 8. Project Name: I hereby apply for consideration of the above described request and declare that the information and materials submitted with this application are complete and accurate. I understand that no application shall be considered complete unless accompanied by fees as required by city ordinance. Applications for projects requiring more than one type of review shall include the cumulative total of all application fees specified for each type of review. I understand that applicants are required to reimburse the city for all out-of-pocket costs incurred for processing, reviewing and hearing the application. These costs shall include, but are not limited to: parcel searches; publication and mailing of notices; review by the city’s engineering, planning and other consultants; legal costs, and recording fees. An escrow deposit to cover these costs will be collected by the city at the time of application. The minimum escrow deposit shall be cumulative total of all minimum escrow deposits for each type of review required for the project, unless reduced as provided for by ordinance. The city may increase the amount of the required escrow deposit at any time if the city’s costs are reasonably expected to exceed the minimum amount. Any balance remaining after review is complete will be refunded to the applicant. No interest is paid on escrow deposits. PLEASE NOTE: If the fee owner is not the applicant, the applicant must provide written authorization by the fee owner in order for this application to be considered complete. Property Fee Owner Signature(s) Date: Applicant Signature(s) Date: For City Use Only Application Fees: _______________________ Escrow Deposit: _______________________ Barr 1 Request for a conditional use permit approval for a 5 MW AC community solar array. Docusign Envelope ID: 97EBB5D9-EF8D-4AC2-B9EE-CB2B15DFF5E5 5/2/2025 5/5/2025 BARR 1 SOLAR PROJECT – CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUMMARY 5 MW AC COMMUNITY SOLAR GARDEN Prepared for: City of Scandia, MN – City Council 14727 209th St. N. Scandia, MN 55073 Applicant Details: Applicant: MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Applicant Address: 2530 Riva Road, Annapolis, MD 21401 Applicant Parent Company: New Energy Equity, LLC Agreement Type: Land Lease located on Private Land Permitting Point of Contact: Jesse Dimond Phone Number / Email: Real Property Owner(s): Dean Barr Trust Parcel ID(s) (PID): 20-032-20-24-0002 PROJECT DESCRIPTION MN CSG 2019-69 LLC, a subsidiary of New Energy Equity, LLC, (“Applicant”) has prepared this Project Summary for the proposed development, installation, and operation of a 5 MW AC community solar photovoltaic facility, including the proposed construction and operation of a permanent access road, interconnection poles and line along Mayberry Tail North. within the jurisdiction of the City of Scandia, MN, known as PID: 20-032-20-24-0002 (the “Solar Facility”) for the purpose of obtaining a Conditional Use Permit from the City of Scandia City Council. The completed and signed application is attached as exhibit 1. The project (also known as the Barr 1 project) will be constructed in the existing field along Mayberry Tail North with existing trees to remain in the south to be used as screening. The project will be a 5 MW AC Community Solar Garden and the total area for permitting will be 38.36 acres out of a total of 72.4 total parcel acres. This includes approximately 25.94 acres of fenced project area. The project will be configured as a solar tracking array and will include approximately 11,960 solar modules. The parcel is managed by the Dean Barr Trust, with Justin Barr as a beneficiary and as their main point of contact, who has entered into a land lease and solar easement, which is attached as Exhibit 2. The project is anticipated to employ approximately 15 individuals, including a foreman, construction staff, Page 2 of 10 delivery drivers, and various other roles. The facility will operate from 7 AM to 7 PM, with any potentially disruptive work scheduled between 8 AM and 5 PM. This thoughtful approach aims to minimize any impact on the community while allowing for non-disruptive activities, such as deliveries, to occur before the main work begins. The site was selected due to its physical characteristics, proximity to existing electrical infrastructure and distribution lines, zoning and permitting requirements, and landowner participation. The Solar Facility’s final design will follow all regulatory, technical, and environmental guidance, requests, rules and requirements of the Utility, Town, City, County, Involved Agencies, as well as following National Electrical Safety Code, the U.S. Department of Labor and Occupational Safety and Health Standards for the safety and protection of landowners, general public, and property. Per the City of Scandia Code, this project will be classified as a Solar Energy System – Distribution Scale (Distribution SES) under Chapter 153 – Unified Development Code. It does not exceed five megawatts (5MW AC) and will be a Community Solar Energy Facility. Code References with Permit Application references and acknowledgements. I. Districts and Size Limits a. Within the SES-0 Overlay District Distribution SES are limited as a Conditional Use in the AG-C, R-C, and I-P zoning districts. • Parcel 20.032.20.24.0002 is zoned as an AG-C zoning district. b. Distribution SES are prohibited in the following areas: 1. Within the Lower St. Croix River Overlay District, within the Shoreland Management Overlay District as it applies to Recreational Development Lakes, the Floodplain Overlay Districts, and the shoreland areas of Falls Creek. • See Exhibit 3 - Sheet PV2: The project will meet all setback requirements for the forementioned districts. 2. Within wetlands to the extent required by the Minnesota Wetlands Conservation Act, and within associated wetland setback areas as designated by the City of Scandia. • See Exhibit 3 - Sheet PV2 and Exhibit 13: Our project will not fall within any wetlands and will meet all setback requirements. 3. All Base Zoning Districts not identified in Chapter 153.300.030 Subd. 1 (BB) La. • Parcel 20.032.20.24.0002 is zoned as a AG-C zoning district. 4. Within any setbacks or buffer areas established within the Base Zoning District or applicable Overlay District. • See Exhibit 3 - Sheet PV2: The project will meet all setback requirements for the forementioned districts. c. Distribution SES within the Shoreland Management Overlay District must also meet the following: • See Exhibit 3 - Sheet PV2: The project will meet all setback requirements for the forementioned districts. 1. The site is within the shoreland of a Natural Environment Lake and all parcels adjacent to the Natural Environment Lake are zoned AG-C. 2. No intensive vegetation clearing shall be allowed. 3. No placement of structures and facilities on slopes over 12%. Page 3 of 10 4. Treatment of stormwater runoff should be consistent with MPCA storm water manual guidance for solar projects. 5. Native vegetation must be planted on the site wherever practical to provide habitat. 6. Best management practices for managing erosion control are utilized. 7. Facility location and design must demonstrate that the facility will minimize impact on habitat and wildlife movement. Compliance with these standards must be shown on submitted plans. d. Distribution SES uses are exempt from the Residential and Agricultural Accessory Structure standards regarding the square footage and number of structures permitted on a parcel, but must comply with the setback and lot coverage standards established in Section [153.200.030]. • See Exhibit 3 - Sheet PV2: The project will meet all setback requirements and lot coverage standards. II. Permit Application a. Existing Site Plans Required The applicant for a Distribution SES must submit a detailed site plan of existing conditions, showing site boundaries; existing access roads, driveways, and easements; existing structures; setbacks; surface water drainage patterns, floodplains, Shoreland districts, delineated wetlands, toe and top of bluffs, ordinary high water mark and other protected natural resources; existing vegetation, soil types, topography (2-foot contour intervals), and all other items required in Section [153.500.050 and 153.500.060] for Conditional/Interim Use Permit applications or by the City. The Existing Site Plan must be at a graphic scale not less than 1:100. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 – PV5 and Exhibit 13. b. Proposed Site Plan Required The applicant must submit a site plan of proposed conditions, including the proposed number, location and spacing of solar panels; proposed height of panels; location of access roads, planned location of underground or overhead electric lines connecting the solar farm to the building, substation or other electric load; new electrical equipment other than at the existing building or substation that is the connection point for the solar farm; proposed stormwater management facilities; proposed erosion and sediment control measures, and other information as required by the City. The Proposed Site Plan must be at a graphic scale not less than 1:100. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 and PV3 c. Vertical Sketch Elevations The application must include two vertical sketch elevations of the premises accurately drawn to a scale identified on the drawing, depicting the proposed solar energy conversion system and its relationship to the surrounding topography and public roadways. The sketches must depict the proposed system's relationship to structures on adjacent lots as viewed from six (6) feet above ground level at the residential structure wall that site closest to the solar installation, one sketch showing the view without screening and the other sketch showing the view with proposed permanent screening. The sketch elevations must include a graphic scale not less than 1:50, or as needed to clearly show the vertical relationship between the proposed solar facilities and structures on adjacent lots. • See Exhibit 4 d. Use of Public Roads The applicant must obtain all necessary approvals from the appropriate road authority for site access and driveways. • The applicant acknowledges this section. e. Interconnection Agreement Page 4 of 10 The applicant must complete an interconnection agreement with a local utility and provide a copy of the agreement to the City before approval of electrical, building, or other required permits. The system operator must provide a visible external disconnect if required by the utility. • We are currently being studied by Xcel with a study completion estimated in Q3 or Q4 of 2025. f. Utility Poles Within the setback or any adjoining parcels owned by the landowner, utility poles shall be limited to one interconnection pole for the solar array system. Additional poles required must meet all required setbacks. The proposed placement of all utility poles, ground equipment, and any proposed aerially mounted equipment must be shown in any proposed plans submitted. • We are working through different options to present to Xcel once an Xcel designer is assigned. If Xcel doesn’t accept our proposal, we request an exception for the Xcel required and maintained poles within the road setback. III. Development Agreement, Financial Guarantees, and Insurance a. Conditional Use Permit In addition to any other lawful conditions, the City also reserves the option of imposing a development agreement regarding the Distribution SES operation including repair, maintenance, and replacement and addressing all requirements set forth in Chapter 153.300.030 Subd. 1 (BB) Solar Energy System — Distribution Scale (Distribution SES). If the City elects to impose a development agreement, the development agreement must be executed before a building permit can be issued and must be recorded against the property. • The applicant acknowledges this section. b. Vegetative Escrow The City will require the establishment of an escrow account, from a credible banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota, to ensure vegetation is installed and establishes itself as identified in the approved permit, based on an estimated cost for plantings and labor provided by the applicant. The planting and screening plan must utilize the recommended plant types described in Section [153.400.060] and must be approved by the City. • The applicant acknowledges this section. c. Decommissioning Plan The applicant must submit a decommissioning plan to ensure that facilities are properly removed after their useful life. If the Distribution SES remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of one year, the system shall be deemed to be abandoned and will constitute a public nuisance. The plan must include provisions for removal of all structures and foundations, restoration of soil and vegetation, and a plan ensuring financial resources will be available to fully decommission the site. The City will require the posting of a bond, letter of credit, or the establishment of an escrow account to ensure decommissioning. The guarantee shall be from a credible banking institution chartered to operate in the State of Minnesota. • See Exhibit 5 d. Payment In Lieu of Taxes Notwithstanding that Minnesota Statutes Section 272.02, Subdivision 24 (or its successor) classifies real property upon which a solar energy generating system is located that is used primarily for solar energy production (subject to the production tax under Minnesota Statutes Section 272.0295) as class 3a, the City may require the applicant to enter into a Payment In Lieu of Taxes Agreement to compensate the City for any prospective tax revenue that may be lost due to such reclassification. • The applicant acknowledges this section. Page 5 of 10 e. Liability Insurance The applicant must maintain a current general liability policy covering bodily injury and property damage with limits of at least $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate or the maximum liability thresholds set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 466.04, as amended, whichever is greater, and provide proof that it meets the insurance requirement to the City. • The applicant acknowledges this section. IV. Performance Standards a. Limitations The limitations on the number or cumulative generating capacity of Distribution SES is regulated by Minnesota Statutes 216B.164 and related regulations. • The applicant acknowledges this section. b. Compliance Distribution SES must comply with all applicable Local, State, and Federal regulatory standards, including the State of Minnesota Uniform Building Code, as amended; the National Electric Code, as amended; the State Plumbing Code, as amended; and the Minnesota Energy Code, as amended. • The applicant acknowledges this section. c. Mitigation Measures If the proposed Distribution SES is adjacent to areas designed or formally protected from development by Local, State, and Federal agencies as a wildlife management area, scenic byway, or National Wild and Scenic corridor, the applicant must implement mitigation measures to protect the resource values of the designated wildlife area or scenic corridor as a condition of approval. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, maintaining wildlife travel corridors, setting the development back from the right-of-way or stream corridor, using the natural topography to screen the project, and retaining or planting vegetation that would fully obscure the view of the energy project within the scenic corridor. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV6. We have added screening to the array to mitigate the visual impact and due to the size of the array, there shouldn’t be any significant impact to wildlife. d. Setbacks The City may require wider setbacks if it determines that the wider setbacks are warranted by the potential impacts to adjacent properties. The nearest solar panel of the Distribution SES must be setback a minimum of: 1. 75 feet from all parcel boundaries. 2. 350 feet from existing residential structures on adjacent parcels existing at the time of the permit application. 3. 800 feet from the centerline of minor arterial roadways or 500 feet from the centerline of all other public road rights-of-way. 4. The structure setback requirements from the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL) for that District if located in the Shoreland Overlay District. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 & PV11. The Setbacks are listed below: 1. 500’ – Road 2. 1,000 ft setbacks from PWI 3. 1,000 ft setbacks from Ground Water Dependent Natural Resource 4. 50’ – Wetland #1 - District Mgmt #3 is the same as City Mgmt #2. 5. 75’ – Wetland #2 District Mgmt #2 is the same as City Mgmt #1. e. Height Limits Ground-mounted solar energy systems may not exceed fifteen feet (15') in height when oriented at Page 6 of 10 maximum tilt. Building-integrated solar energy systems when at maximum tilt may not exceed the maximum height permitted in the Base Zoning District. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV3 - The applicant acknowledges this section. f. Screening All components of the Distribution SES must be screened by: 1. Setbacks 2. Berming 3. Scenic canvas 4. Existing vegetation 5. Terrain 6. Landscaping 7. A combination thereof • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 & PV8. g. Screening from View The solar array must be screened from view from: 1. Adjacent road right-of-way. 2. Dwellings within five hundred feet (500') of any component of the solar array. 3. Public waterbodies, as viewed from six (6) feet above the ordinary high water level. 4. The City may require greater screening as needed based on development patterns within the City and the adopted Comprehensive Plan. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 & PV8. h. Visual Screen The visual screen must fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels during leaf-on and leaf-off conditions. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV8 - The applicant acknowledges this section. i. Screening Completion The screening shall fully obscure 100% view of the solar panels from any adjacent road right-of-way immediately upon screen completion in accordance with this section, and shall be completed prior to the remainder of solar facilities and panel installation. Effectiveness of screen shall be reviewed and approved by city staff prior to continuation of project installation. Permanent vegetative screening shall be designed to have a horizontal depth of at least twenty (20) feet. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 & PV8 - The applicant acknowledges this section. j. Vegetative Buffer At least seventy (70) percent of the area of the vegetative buffer, as measured in square feet, must be composed of coniferous plantings interspersed throughout the screening. The rest of the vegetative buffer must be composed of densely branched trees and shrubs, as approved by the Zoning Administrator. A landscaping plan must be provided that shows screening elements, including the species of any vegetation used for screening. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 & PV8 - The applicant acknowledges this section. k. Screening Establishment The required screening must be achieved within six (6) growing seasons from the date of project approval. If the screening is not established within 6 growing seasons, it must be implemented through the planting of mature vegetation to fully obscure (100%) view of the solar panels as described in Chapter 153.300.030 Subd. 1 (BB) III.1. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 & PV8 - The applicant acknowledges this section. l. Screening Summary Table Page 7 of 10 From Percent Obscured Screened Adjacent Road Right-of-Way 100 Immediately upon screen completion, prior to the remainder of solar facilities and panel installation Dwellings within five hundred feet (500') of any component of the solar array 100 Within 6 growing seasons Public waterbodies, as viewed from six (6) feet above the ordinary high water level 100 Within 6 growing seasons • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV2 & PV8 - The applicant acknowledges this section. m. Fences or Barriers Any fences or barriers installed for the project must be mounted on wood posts, and may not include any chain link, barbed or razor wire. The fence may not exceed eight (8) feet in height from the ground, and must incorporate wildlife-friendly design with a gap at the bottom for passage of birds and small animals. The City will utilize recommendations from the Minnesota DNR to determine if the fence design is wildlife-friendly. • See Exhibit 3 – sheets PV4. n. Scenic Canvases Temporary screening through the use of scenic canvases is only permissible if it has been approved as part of the project application or it is required as a permit condition. 1. Scenic canvases may only be used to temporarily screen Distribution SES installations for a maximum of six (6) years. 2. Applicants shall supply a visual representation of the appearance of the canvas for review by the City. 3. If a canvas was not included as part of an original application but has been required as part of a conditional approval, then the applicant shall provide the City with a site plan and a visual sample of the canvas design based on the requirements of this section for the City’s final approval. 4. Scenic canvas shall be attached to fencing, and shall have a natural vegetation or scenic views printed on the entire outward facing portion of the canvas to match the existing surroundings and vegetative screening of the Distribution SES. 5. Canvases must be designed to accommodate wildlife movement. 6. Prohibitions: The following is prohibited from scenic canvases: • Canvases that include visible messages or depict images other than what is required are not eligible for use as scenic canvas. • Scenic canvases may not be used as a substitute for the implementation of vegetative screening or as a substitute for achieving the final required level of screening coverage within prescribed timeframes. 7. Scenic canvasing must be removed once vegetative screening is established. 8. Damage and replacement of canvases: If any canvas becomes damaged or fades to the point it no longer camouflages prior to the completion of the compliance period to establish vegetative cover, said canvas must be replaced within sixty (60) days of notice to the landowner and owner of the Distribution SES. Should the owner fail to comply with this requirement, the City may replace said canvas at the owner's full expense as prescribed under the developer's agreement. • The applicant acknowledges this section. Page 8 of 10 o. Stormwater Management and Erosion Control Distribution SES are subject to stormwater management and erosion and sediment control best practices, including DNR guidelines on Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control, and NPDES permit requirements, and must obtain required permits from the MPCA, local Watershed District, City, and others. • The applicant acknowledges this section. p. Ground Areas All ground areas under solar array installs that are not occupied by equipment or essential access paths must be planted with a deep-rooted, native grass and pollinator seed mix suitable to the soil and moisture conditions of the immediate area. Plant growth must be stable and self-supporting within one (1) growing season from the date of building permit approval. If approved, the City may allow agricultural pasture plantings under the array. If the agricultural pasture ceases, the ground area shall be planted as required with native grass and pollinator seed mix. • The applicant acknowledges this section. q. Building Permit Plans All plans submitted for Building Permit approval must be prepared by a licensed, professional engineer. • The applicant acknowledges this section. r. Power and Communication Lines Power and communication lines that are not defined in this ordinance as Essential Services and running between banks of solar panels and the interconnection pole or other point of interconnection must be buried underground. Exemptions may be granted by the City in instances where shallow bedrock, water courses, or other elements of the natural landscape interfere with the ability to bury lines, or the distance to a substation or other point of interconnection reasonably precludes burial. • We are working through different options to present to Xcel once an Xcel designer is assigned. If Xcel doesn’t accept our proposal, we request an exception for the Xcel required and maintained poles within the road setback. s. Reflective Glare Prevention All Distribution SES facilities must be designed and located in order to prevent reflective glare toward any inhabited buildings on adjacent properties, as well as adjacent street rights-of-way. Steps to control glare nuisance may include selective placement of the system, screening on the side of the solar array facing the reflectors, reducing use of the reflector system, or other remedies that limit glare. Distribution SES utilizing a reflector system must conduct a glare study to identify the impacts of the system on occupied buildings and transportation rights-of-way within a half mile of the project boundary. The glare study must also address aviation impacts. • See Exhibit 6 t. Lot Coverage The surface area of posts and related equipment for ground-mounted systems in combination with driveways, structures, and other impervious surfaces on the parcel may not exceed the maximum lot coverage standard of the applicable Zoning District. • Current estimated: IMPERVIOUS AREA (MOUNTING POSTS, ACCESS ROAD, & EQUIPMENT PAD): ~31,887.19ft2 (~0.73 ACRE) u. Lighting If lighting is provided at the project, lighting must be shielded and downcast such that the light does not spill onto adjacent properties. • The applicant acknowledges this section. Page 9 of 10 v. Abandonment If the Distribution SES remains nonfunctional or inoperative for a continuous period of one year, the system shall be deemed to be abandoned and will constitute a public nuisance. The owner must remove the abandoned system at their expense after obtaining a demolition permit. Removal includes the entire structure including transmission equipment. • The applicant acknowledges this section. Page 10 of 10 List of Exhibits 1. Application Form - Barr 1 2. Lease and Amendment - Barr 1 3a. Barr 1 - CUP - Stamped Pages 3b. Barr 1 - CUP - Non-Stamped Pages 3c. Barr 1 - CUP - Grading and Storm Water Pages 4. Vertical Sketch Elevation Sims 9.9.25 5. Barr 1 - Decom Plan - 8.29.25 6. Glare Analysis 5.6.25 - Barr 1 7. 2025.07.07 - Barr I Solar – SURVEY 8. Warranty Deed - 20-032-20-24-0002 9. Emergency Response Plan 4-22-24 – Aholt 10. Site Rules 11. Module PRODUCT SAFETY DATA SHEET 12. About Us 13. MN CSG 2019-69 (Barr 1) LLC_L2 Wetland Delineation_Report_Final 14. Barr 1 - SWPPP - 8.26.2025 15. Barr 1 - Tree Preservation Plan REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC NTS FENCE DETAIL PV4 NTS 8' FIXED KNOT FENCE1 20' MAX LINE POST CAP 8' TENSION WIRE POST CAP TENSION BAND 3" Ø CORNER/END POST 2 1/2" Ø LINE POSTVERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL SPACING PER MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS GALVANIZED TRUSS ROD GALVANIZED BRACE RAIL 20' 4" Ø GATE POST TOP HINGE BOTTOM HINGE 90°SWING PLUNGER RODLATCHES TRUSS ROD NOTE: 1.THIS DRAWING IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT TO BE USED FOR CONTRUCTION. 2.DO NOT SCALE DRAWING NTS 8' FIXED KNOT FENCE GATE2 3 NTS MAIN ACCESS SIGNAGE DETAIL3 FACILITY NAME: BARR 1 CSG PROJECT OWNER: MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 2530 RIVA RD SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 24-HOUR EMERGENCY CONTACT: TBD ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO SCENIC CANVAS AREA 1 (OUTLINED IN RED) SCENIC CANVAS AREA 2 (OUTLINED IN RED) REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC NTS SCENIC CANVAS DETAIL PV4B SCENIC CANVAS DETAILS: 1.TO BE USED TO TEMPORARILY SCREEN THE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM FOR A MAXIMUM OF SIX (6) YEARS 2.TO BE ATTACHED TO FENCING, AND SHALL HAVE A NATURAL VEGETATION OR SCENIC VIEWS ADJACENT TO PROPOSED ADDED SCREENING LOCATIONS. 3.TO BE DESIGNED TO ALLOW FOR WILDLIFE MOVEMENT. 4.CANVAS SHALL NOT INCLUDE VISIBLE MESSAGES OR DEPICT IMAGES OTHER THAN WHAT IS REQUIRED. 5.NOT TO BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF VEGETATIVE SCREENING OR AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR ACHIEVING THE FINAL REQUIRED LEVEL OF SCREENING COVERAGE WITHIN PRESCRIBED TIMEFRAMES. 6.ONCE VEGETATIVE SCREENING IS ESTABLISHED, CANVAS IS TO BE REMOVED. 7.IF ANY CANVAS BECOMES DAMAGED OR FADES TO THE POINT IT NO LONGER CAMOUFLAGES PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THE COMPLIANCE PERIOD TO ESTABLISH VEGETATIVE COVER, SAID CANVAS IS TO BE REPLACED WITHIN SIXTY (60) DAYS OF NOTICE TO THE LANDOWNER AND OWNER OF THE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM. 1" = 120' SCENIC CANVAS LOCATIONS1 NTS EXAMPLE SCENIC CANVAS DETAIL2 REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC NTS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PV5 NTS INFILTRATION BASIN1 NTS RIP RAP OVERFLOW2 6" 2' 6" PER PLAN 2" 6" 6" 30' PONDED VOLUME OVERFLOW ELEV = TOP OF BERM ELEV = RIP RAP OVERFLOW 4:1 SLOPE EXISTING SUBGRADE - PROTECT FROM COMPACTION POND BOTTOM ELEV = CLASS I RIP RAP OVER GEOTEXTILE FABRIC BERM (5' MIN) BASIN PLAN VIEW OVERFLOW ELEVATION GEOTEXTILE FABRIC LINER ALONG BOTTOM OF RIP RAP 4 1 1 2 2' DIRECTION OF FLOW A A B B © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO S89°20'28"E 2555.12 S1°56'57"W 151.00 S89°20'28"E 65.01 S1 ° 5 6 ' 5 7 " W 1 1 6 7 . 9 3 N89°18'00"W 2129.38 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 5 8 7 . 0 8 N89°18'00"W 483.55 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 7 2 9 . 8 2 SE P T I C S Y S T E M APPROXIMATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY (~3,880ft2) APPROXIMATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY (~3,880ft2) REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 1" = 120' TOPOGRAPHY DETAIL PV6 SHEET NOTES: UTILITY POLES ARE SHOWN FOR INDICATING LOCATIONS ONLY. SPACING BETWEEN POLES, PHYSICAL PROTECTION BARRIER FOR SWITCHBOARDS, ETC. WILL BE ADDED IN THE DRAWINGS PREPARED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LEGEND PARCEL BOUNDARY (PID: 2003220240002, LAND OWNER: DEAN D BARR TRUST) FIELD DELINEATED WETLANDS (WITH 75' SETBACKS, AREA M ) BIG MARINE LAKE ARRAY FENCE LINE (~5600' AND ~28.86 ACRES) 15' WIDE ACCESS ROAD (~1638') SLOPES ABOVE 12% VICINITY MAP PROJECT LOCATION PARCEL UNDER CONSIDERATION PID: 20.032.20.24.0002 LO: DEAN D BARR TRUST ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 20.032.20.22.0005 LO: SCANDIA TRAIL SOLAR LLC ZONING: 305 INDUSTRIAL PID: 19.032.20.11.0007 LO: XCEL ENERGY ZONING: 305 INDUSTRIAL PID: 19.032.20.11.0006 LO: SCANDIA TRAIL SOLAR LLC ZONING: 305 INDUSTRIAL PID: 20.032.20.23.0003 LO: MOZEL, LEO M ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.23.0002 LO: LUND, JEFFREY & HAYLEY ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 19.032.20.14.0001 LO: NEPHEW, KEVIN & SARAH ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 19.032.20.13.0001 LO: LUBKE, MICHAEL & MOLLY MINOGUE ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 20.032.20.22.0002 LO: KENNETH J LUND TRS ETAL ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 20.032.20.21.0001 LO: KENNETH J LUND TRS ETAL ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 20.032.20.21.0002 LO: WENDORF LLOYD F & JEAN L. ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.12.0006 LO: DEAN D BARR TRS ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.24.0001 LO: JERECZEK, DUANE D & DEBORAH L ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.12.0002 LO: JERECZEK DUANE D & DEBORAH L ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.12.0005 LO: DEAN D BARR TRS ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.12.0004 LO: WRIGHT, ARNOLD P. & DEBORAH A. ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.12.0003 LO: HOXMEIER, THEODORE R. & THERESA J. ZONING: 252 MANAGED FOREST LAND PID: 20.032.20.13.0001 LO: HOXMEIER, THEODORE R. & THERESA J. ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.13.0003 LO: JERECZEK, DUANE D & DEBORAH L ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.13.0002 LO: DEAN D BARR TRS ZONING: 211 RURAL VACANT LAND PID: 20.032.20.42.0001 LO: MN DNR TRAILS & WATERWAYS DIV ZONING: 981 STATE ACQUIRED PID: 20.032.20.42.0003 LO: JOHNSTON MARTIAL TRS ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.42.0002 LO: ST PIERRE MICHELLE ETAL ZONING: 125 SRR PID: 20.032.20.31.0001 LO: ROBIN L BOOREN TRS ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURALPID: 20.032.20.32.0001 LO: ROBIN L BOOREN TRS ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 19.032.20.41.0002 LO: WOOD MATTHEW D & NICHOLE H ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 19.032.20.42.0003 LO: ALTNOW, MARK C. & NANETTE ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 19.032.20.41.0001 LO: WOOLEY, FERGUS R. JR & LAURA J. FEARING ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 20.032.20.12.0001 LO: SETTERHOLM, DALE R. MICHELLE ZONING: 100 RES 1 UNIT PID: 17.032.20.33.0005 LO: NICKELSON, KEVIN R. SUZANNE ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 17.032.20.33.0006 LO: NICKELSON, KEVIN R. SUZANNE ZONING: 211 RURAL VACANT LAND PID: 17.032.20.34.0001 LO: KENNETH J. LUND TRUST ETAL ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL PID: 19.032.20.11.0004 LO: NICKELSON, TRENT E. ZONING: 200 AGRICULTURAL REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 1" = 200' PID & ZONING MAP DETAIL PV7 SHEET NOTES: UTILITY POLES ARE SHOWN FOR INDICATING LOCATIONS ONLY. SPACING BETWEEN POLES, PHYSICAL PROTECTION BARRIER FOR SWITCHBOARDS, ETC. WILL BE ADDED IN THE DRAWINGS PREPARED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS VICINITY MAP PROJECT LOCATION APPROXIMATELY 86 TREES TO BE USED FOR SCREENING. 2 STAGGERED ROWS OF A MIX OF NORWAY PINE, EASTERN RED CEDAR, WHITE PINE, WHITE SPRUCE, & WHITE CEDAR (DETAILS IN TABLE ABOVE) 22111112222211111 55333334444455555 2211111222 3344444555 2 2 3 3 2 3 112222211111 3334444455555 16' ON CENTER 16' ON CENER 8' STAGGERING BETWEEN ROWS APPROXIMATELY 50 TREES TO BE USED FOR SCREENING. 2 STAGGERED ROWS OF A MIX OF NORWAY PINE, EASTERN RED CEDAR, WHITE PINE, WHITE SPRUCE, & WHITE CEDAR (DETAILS IN TABLE ABOVE) 44444 1111122222 55555 111112222211 333334444455 16' ON CENTER 16' ON CENER 8' STAGGERING BETWEEN ROWS REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC NTS LANDSCAPE PLAN A PV8A 1" = 50' PROPOSED ADDED SCREENING DETAIL2 LEGEND PROPOSED OVERHEAD LINE EXTENSION (~790') PROPOSED NEW UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE (~712') ARRAY FENCE LINE (~5300' AND ~25.94 ACRES) ACCESS ROAD (~1638'; 20' WIDE FROM ENTRANCE TO FENCE, 15' WIDE AFTER ENTERING THE FENCE) TREE CLEARING AREA (~2.03 ACRES) EXISTING TREES TO BE MAINTAINED FOR SCREENING PURPOSES 2 STAGGERED ROWS OF A MIX OF: EASTERN RED CEDAR, WHITE SPRUCE, NORWAY PINE, WHITE PINE, & WHITE CEDAR TREES. ALL 1'-4' TALL AT TIME OF PLANTING (~0.66 ACRES, ~1.51% OF LOP) NTS PLANTING DETAIL TABLE1 REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC NTS LANDSCAPE PLAN B PV8B Scale: N.T.S. PROPOSED ADDED SCREENING SPECIES TO BE USED (MN NATIVE TREE MIX)1 COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME / MAP NUMBER: WHITE CEDAR / THUJA OCCIDENTALIS / 5 HEIGHT: 18' MIN AT MATURITY ROOT SPECIFICATIONS: BALLED & BURLAPPED (TBD BY EPC) COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME / MAP NUMBER: EASTERN RED CEDAR / JUNIPERUS VIRGINIANA / 3 HEIGHT: 18' MIN WITHIN AT MATURITY ROOT SPECIFICATIONS: BALLED & BURLAPPED (TBD BY EPC) COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME / MAP NUMBER: WHITE SPRUCE / PICEA GLAUCA / 4 HEIGHT: 18' MIN AT MATURITY ROOT SPECIFICATIONS: BALLED & BURLAPPED (TBD BY EPC) COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME / MAP NUMBER: NORWAY PINE / PINUS RESINOSA / 1 HEIGHT: 36' MIN AT MATURITY ROOT SPECIFICATIONS: BALLED & BURLAPPED (TBD BY EPC) COMMON / BOTANICAL NAME: WHITE PINE / PINUS STROBUS / 2 HEIGHT: 36' MIN AT MATURITY ROOT SPECIFICATIONS: BALLED & BURLAPPED (TBD BY EPC) Scale: N.T.S. BALLED & BURLAPPED STOCK PLANTING DETAILS2 1. SCARIFY SIDES AND BOTTOM OF HOLE. 2. PROCEED WITH CORRECTIVE PRUNING. 3. SET TREE ON UNEXCAVATED SUBGRADE. PLACE TREE SO THE ROOT FLARE IS AT R UP TO 2" ABOVE THE FINISHED GRADE WITH BURLAP AND WIRE BASKET, (IF USED), INTACT. 4. SLIT REMAINING TREATED BURLAP AT 6" INTERVALS. 5. BACKFILL TO WITHIN APPROXIMATELY 12" OF THE TOP OF THE ROOTBALL, THEN WATER TREE. 6. REMOVE THE TOP 1/3 OF THE BASKET OR THE TOP TWO HORIZONTAL RINGS WHICHEVER IS GREATER. REMOVE ALL BURLAP AND NAILS FROM THE TOP 1/3 OF THE BALL. REMOVE ALL TWINE. REMOVE OR CORRECT STEM GIRDLING ROOTS. 7. PLUM AND BACKFILL WITH NATIVE SOIL. 8. PROVIDE 3" DEPTH LEVEL SAUCER AROUND OUTSIDE OF PLANTING PIT TO RETAIN WATER. 9. WATER THOROUGHLY WITHIN 2 HOURS TO SETTLE TREE AND FILL VOIDS 10. BACK FILL VOIDS AND WATER A SECOND TIME. 11. PLACE ULCH WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE SECOND WATERING UNLESS SOIL MOISTURE IS EXCESSIVE. 12. MULCH DEPTH TO BE MINIMU 3" DEPTH. 13. PULL MULCH BACK NO LESS THAN 3" AND NO MORE THAN 6" FROM TREES AT THE TRUNK OR MAIN STEM. 14. SUBSIDING OR DETERIORATING MULCH IS ACCEPTABLE THROUGHOUT THE ESTABLISHED PERIOD IF MULCH DEPTH IS MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM OF 3" DEPTH. 15. MULCH CONTAMINATED WITH SOIL MUST BE REMOVED AND REPLACED. MV TRANSFORMER #1; READILY ACCESSIBLE EQUIPMENT PAD #1; READILY ACCESSIBLE MV TRANSFORMER #2; READILY ACCESSIBLE EQUIPMENT PAD #2; READILY ACCESSIBLE MAYBERRY TRAIL N 3 NEW OVERHEAD POLES WITH MIN 30’ POLE SPACING; INCLUDING UTILITY METER, RECLOSER & GOAB UTILITY AC DISCONNECT; TO BE WITHIN 5’-10’ OF ACCESS ROAD; READILY ACCESSIBLE; PLACARD TO BE PLACED AT UTILITY METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT RISER POLE REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 1" = 120' SEEDING DETAIL PV8C SHEET NOTES: UTILITY POLES ARE SHOWN FOR INDICATING LOCATIONS ONLY. SPACING BETWEEN POLES, PHYSICAL PROTECTION BARRIER FOR SWITCHBOARDS, ETC. WILL BE ADDED IN THE DRAWINGS PREPARED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LEGEND EXISTING 1-PH UTILITY LINE (~1.1 MILES TO BE UPGRADED TO 3-PH) PROPOSED OVERHEAD LINE EXTENSION (~790') PROPOSED NEW UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE (~712') ARRAY FENCE LINE (~5300' AND ~25.94 ACRES) ACCESS ROAD (~1638'; 20' WIDE FROM ENTRANCE TO FENCE, 15' WIDE AFTER ENTERING THE FENCE) 2 STAGGERED ROWS OF A MIX OF: EASTERN RED CEDAR, WHITE SPRUCE, NORWAY PINE, WHITE PINE, & WHITE CEDAR TREES. ALL 1'-4' TALL AT TIME OF PLANTING (~0.66 ACRES, ~1.51% OF LOP) LOW PROFILE SEED MIXTURE, TO RESTORE DISTURBED AREAS THROUGH SEEDING (~7.97 ACRES) VICINITY MAP PROJECT LOCATION REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 1" = 100' SOIL MAP PV10 SHEET NOTES: UTILITY POLES ARE SHOWN FOR INDICATING LOCATIONS ONLY. SPACING BETWEEN POLES, PHYSICAL PROTECTION BARRIER FOR SWITCHBOARDS, ETC. WILL BE ADDED IN THE DRAWINGS PREPARED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS SOIL MAP LEGEND MAP UNIT SYMBOL MAP UNIT NAME 155B CHETEK SANDY LOAM, 1 TO 6 PERCENT SLOPES 159B ANOKA LOAMY FINE SAND, 3 TO 9 PERCENT SLOPES 543 MARKEY MUCK 1033 UDIFLUVENTS VICINITY MAP PROJECT LOCATION 350' 75' 350' 350' 350'350' 75' 350' 350' 500' 50' REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 1" = 150' SETBACK MAP PV11 SHEET NOTES: UTILITY POLES ARE SHOWN FOR INDICATING LOCATIONS ONLY. SPACING BETWEEN POLES, PHYSICAL PROTECTION BARRIER FOR SWITCHBOARDS, ETC. WILL BE ADDED IN THE DRAWINGS PREPARED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS Distribution SES are prohibited in the following areas: 1.Within the Lower St. Croix River Overlay District, within the Shoreland Management Overlay District as it applies to Recreational Development Lakes, the Floodplain Overlay Districts, and the shoreland areas of Falls Creek. LEGEND PARCEL BOUNDARY (PID: 20.032.20.24.0002, LAND OWNER: DEAN D BARR TRUST) 75' SETBACK FROM PARCEL BOUNDARY DWELLINGS ON NEIGHBORING PARCELS (WITH 350' SETBACKS) MAYBERRY N CENTERLINE (WITH 500' SETBACKS, NTS; PUBLIC ROAD SETBACK ) 50' WETLAND SETBACK #1 - DISTRICT MGMT #3 SAME AS CITY MGMT #2 75' WETLAND SETBACK #2 DISTRICT MGMT #2 IS THE SAME AS CITY MGMT #1 BIG MARINE LAKE (WITH 1000' SETBACKS) ARRAY FENCE LINE (~5300' AND ~25.94 ACRES) 15' WIDE ACCESS ROAD (~1638') VICINITY MAP PROJECT LOCATION © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO S89°20'28"E 2555.12 S1°56'57"W 151.00 S89°20'28"E 65.01 S1 ° 5 6 ' 5 7 " W 1 1 6 7 . 9 3 N89°18'00"W 2129.38 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 5 8 7 . 0 8 N89°18'00"W 483.55 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 7 2 9 . 8 2 SE P T I C S Y S T E M CONSTRUCTION PARKING AREA (ALSO FOR USE BY EMERGENCY SERVICE VEHICLES) ~12,100ft2 TURNAROUND AREA TURNAROUND AREATURNAROUND AREA MAYBERRY TRAIL N 2400' TO L O F T O N AVE N 4730' TO MANNING T R A I L N REVISIONS #DESCRIPTION BY DATE 0 ORIGINAL DESIGN SP 8/24/2023 1 UPDATE TO SLD SP 3/27/2024 2 UPDATE GROUND XFMR SPECS SP 5/14/2024 3 UTILITY COMMENTS SP 8/8/2024 4 CUP PACKAGE NGA 3/12/2025 5 LO COMMENTS ADDRESSED NGA 3/24/2025 6 40% GCR & POLES EDITED NGA 4/25/2025 7 ADDITIONAL PAGES AMJ 4/30/2025 8 PERMITTING EDITS & PROP MOD NGA 6/19/2025 9 LOP & VEGETATION EDITS NGA 7/14/2025 10 PROPOSED MOD NGA 8/8/2025 11 CUP REFRESH NGA 8/29/2025 PROJECT NAME DRAWING TITLE SCALE 1 SHEET BARR 1 OTHER NOTES CASE NUMBER 05800014 PRIMARY CONTACT: DEAN EASTLAKE APPLICATION AGENT: DEAN EASTLAKE NO POSITION, DISTANCE, OR CLEARANCE ISSUES WITH OVERHEAD ELECTRIC SERVICE LINES OR OTHER UTILITIES IN RELATION TO THE PV PANELS. 24/7 UNESCORTED KEYLESS ACCESS PROVIDED FOR ALL UTILITY ENERGY EQUIPMENT INCLUDING THE METERS AND UTILITY AC DISCONNECT. IF THE MAIN SERVICE METER IS LOCATED MORE THAN 10' FROM THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT, A PLACARD WILL BE PLACED AT THE MAIN SERVICE METER SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE UTILITY AC DISCONNECT INTERCONNECTION TYPE: PRIMARY PROJECT ADDRESS 11522 MAYBERRY TR N SCANDIA, MN 55047 LAT: 45.246225 LONG: -92.868917 SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS SYSTEM SIZE DC 7,116.200 kW SYSTEM SIZE AC 4999.968 kW DC/AC RATIO 1.4232 AZIMUTH 180° TILT +/- 52° MODULE COUNT 11960 MODULE TYPE HANWA Q.PEAK XL-G11S SERIES - 595 MODULE STC RATING 595 W INVERTER COUNT 36 INVERTER TYPE SMA SUNNY HIGHPOWER PEAK-3 150kW INVERTER POWER POWER LIMITED TO 138.888kW RACKING TBD MONITORING ALSO ENERGY DESIGN CRITERIA MIN/MAX TEMP.-26°C / 32°C WIND SPEED (ASCE 7-10)105 MPH BUILDING CATEGORY I EXPOSURE CATEGORY C GROUND SNOW LOAD 50 PSF BUILDING HEIGHT 0'-0" DRAWING SHEETS AND CONTENTS NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT EXPLICIT WRITTEN CONSENT FROM NEW ENERGY EQUITY LLC. NEW ENERGY EQUITY, LLC 2530 RIVA ROAD, SUITE 200 ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 NEWENERGYEQUITY.COM 443-267-5012 1 DRAWING SCALE ACCURATE WHEN THIS PAGE IS PRINTED ON 24"x36" PAPER. LEGAL ENTITY NAME (CUSTOMER OF RECORD): MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 1" = 120' TRAFFIC PLAN PV12 SHEET NOTES: UTILITY POLES ARE SHOWN FOR INDICATING LOCATIONS ONLY. SPACING BETWEEN POLES, PHYSICAL PROTECTION BARRIER FOR SWITCHBOARDS, ETC. WILL BE ADDED IN THE DRAWINGS PREPARED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS LEGEND PARCEL BOUNDARY (PID: 20.032.20.24.0002, LAND OWNER: DEAN D BARR TRUST) 75' SETBACK FROM PARCEL BOUNDARY DWELLINGS ON NEIGHBORING PARCELS (WITH 350' SETBACKS) MAYBERRY N CENTERLINE (WITH 500' SETBACKS, NTS; PUBLIC ROAD SETBACK ) FIELD DELINEATED WETLANDS (WITH 75' SETBACKS, AREA M ) BIG MARINE LAKE (WITH 1000' SETBACKS) EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE (XCEL, FEEDER: HUG321, 34.5kV, 3-PH; DETAILED ON PV2B) EXISTING 1-PH UTILITY LINE (~1.1 MILES TO BE UPGRADED TO 3-PH) PROPOSED OVERHEAD LINE EXTENSION (~790') PROPOSED NEW UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL LINE (~712') ARRAY FENCE LINE (~5300' AND ~25.94 ACRES) ACCESS ROAD (~1638'; 20' WIDE FROM ENTRANCE TO FENCE, 15' WIDE AFTER ENTERING THE FENCE) LIMITS OF PERMITTING (~43.84 ACRES) TREE CLEARING AREA (~2.03 ACRES, ~4.65% OF LOP) EXISTING TREES TO BE MAINTAINED FOR SCREENING PURPOSES (~5.46 ACRES; ~12.48% OF LOP) 2 STAGGERED ROWS OF A MIX OF: EASTERN RED CEDAR, WHITE SPRUCE, NORWAY PINE, WHITE PINE, & WHITE CEDAR TREES. ALL 1'-4' TALL AT TIME OF PLANTING (~0.66 ACRES, ~1.51% OF LOP) TRAFFIC CONTROL PATHS (RED = LEAVING, GREEN = ENTERING) VICINITY MAP PROJECT LOCATION BARR 1 CSG Solar Array Decommissioning Plan Prepared for: MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 2530 Riva Road Suite 200, Annapolis, MD, 21401 Location: SCANDIA, MN August 29, 2025 BARR 1 CSG Decommissioning Plan Table of Contents 1 -Introduction…...............................................................................................................1 2 -Summary Statement of Expected Residual Value…........................................................1 3 -Basis of Plan Narrative…................................................................................................1‐2 4 -Schedule of Removal and Restoration Costs…................................................................3 5 -Schedule of Salvage Values….........................................................................................4 6 - Schedule of Summary….................................................................................................4 August 29, 2025 BARR 1 CSG Decommissioning Plan 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Summary Statement of Expected Decommissioning Cost 3.0 Basis of Plan Narrative 3.1 General • • • • • Page 1 Haul costs assume a maximum distance of 60 miles between the project and nearest disposal or recycling facility. The intent of the decommissioning work will be to fully remove the solar facility, dispose of any components, and restore the site to a permanently stabilized grassed field. The service life of the facility is assumed to be 35 years. Because of this there is inherent uncertainty with pricing estimates that far into the future. All dollar amounts are in net present value (NPV). It is assumed that all values will inflate/deflate consistent with inflation, therefore, the NPV comparison of removal cost to salvage value will remain relevant at the end of the service life. Costs associated with this plan represent a “turn key” operation for a general contractor to be hired for this work, including permits, mobilization, contingency, etc. The expected residual value of the solar facility is the difference between the removal/restoration cost and the salvage value. The decommissioning cost to remove the solar PV facility and reestablish the property back to a grassy field is not expected to exceed a net expenditure of $563,344.80. The following is a list of assumptions and clarifications to further define the methodology used to establish the scope and values of the removal costs and salvage values. The purpose of this report is to describe the decommissioning process for the BARR 1 CSG solar photovoltaic generation facility (“the project”) located at 11522 MAYBERRY TR N, SCANDIA, MN 55047. The project consists of 11960 solar modules mounted to a driven pile, Single Axis Tracker system. After final circuit consolidation at the equipment pad mounted switchboard, the system’s voltage will be stepped‐up to distribution level at a transformer and interconnected, onto an existing utility distribution circuit. The project converts approximately 25.94 acres of agricultural land into a power generation facility. Construction includes solar modules mounted on driven steel piles, inverters, concrete transformer and equipment pads, and gravel access roads. August 29, 2025 No maximum duration has been assigned for this work. It has been assumed that this work would be handled by a single crew without full time site personnel. BARR 1 CSG Decommissioning Plan 3.2 Civil Infrastructure • • • • • • 3.3 Structural Infrastructure • • 3.4 Electrical Infrastructure • • • • • • • • 3.5 Recycling PV Modules • o CreaƟng a useful and sustainable method of disposal o Providing raw materials for repurposing and reprocessing o o o Recycling of rare earth metals. Page 2 Copper wiring will be dug up (if required) and recycled. Aluminum wiring will be dug up (if required) and recycled. Topsoil used to backfill excavations will be borrowed from onsite locations. No topsoil import is included. Removal of rip rap at stormwater basins is included. Aggregate removal will be the full depth of the aggregate section for roads, equipment pads, and other areas utilizing aggregate. No aggregate will be buried. Includes subgrade scarification prior to backfilling with topsoil. Turf establishment includes mulch, fertilizer, and water as necessary to achieve 70% ground cover as required to satisfy the NPDES Construction General Permit. Sediment control cost consists of silt fence but could also be fiber logs. Location of sediment control will be downslope from exposed soils only in areas where sedimentation offsite or into onsite water bodies can reasonably be expected. Trees and shrubs shall be protected and shall remain in place. August 29, 2025 Recovering up to 90% of the photovoltaic glass and up to 95% of the semiconductor material necessary for further production Recycling solar modules have environmental benefits such as Customer owned site riser or interconnection poles shall be removed. A two‐person crew can dismantle a string inverter and recycle the components. Transformers are pad mounted and weigh approximately 8,500 pounds. These are dry type transformers, so there is no need for any oil disposal. Underground power and communication cables can be removed by excavating with a power trencher or excavator. Switchgear including transformers will be removed from their respective concrete pads and recycled or returned to the manufacturer. Steel pile foundation removal is estimated at 25% the effort and cost as pile installation. Steel racking removal is estimated at 50% the effort and cost of racking installation. PV modules to be recycled. Assumption is that the module value will be based off the module wattage. i.e. a higher wattage module will be worth more than a lower one. BARR 1 CSG Decommissioning Plan 4.0 Schedule of Removal and Restoration Costs Page 3August 29, 2025 QUANTITY UNITS $/UNIT COST NOTES 1 Road Aggregate, Rip Rap, and Geotextile Removal 16380 ft3 $ 1.00 $ 16,380.00 Remove full section of aggregate road, rip rap, and geotextile fabrics 2 Road Aggregate, Rip Rap, and Geotextile Haul and Offsite Disposal 16380 ft3 $ 3.22 $ 52,800.00 Hauling offsite 3Topsoil Backfill 7500 ft3 $ 1.00 $ 7,500.00 Onsite relocation of topsoil to backfill road and equipment pad excavations 4 Chainlink Fence Removal 5,300 ft $ 1.00 $ 5,300.00 5 Chainlink Fence Haul and Offsite Disposal 26,500 lbs $ 0.03 $ 809.38 6Concrete Equipment Pad Removal 2 EA $ 5,000.00 $ 10,000.00 7Concrete Waste Haul and Offsite Disposal 2 EA $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 8Site Grading 2.594 Acres $ 5,000.00 $ 12,970.00 Grading smooth all areas disturbed by removals, excavations, etc, assumed (0.1 x project area) + Road Area + Equipment Pad Area 9Turf Establishment 25.94 Acres $ 1,500.00 $ 38,910.00 Hydroseed all areas disturbed by removals, excavations, etc 10 Sediment Control 1767 ft $ 10.00 $ 17,666.67 Silt fence installation 11 Foundation Removal 2632 EA $ 20.18 $ 53,107.26 ~25% of Install cost 12 Foundation Haul and Offsite Disposal 2632 EA $ 5.97 $ 15,707.40 13 Racking Removal 370760 lbs $ 0.35 $ 131,617.14 ~50% of Install cost 14 Racking Haul and Offsite Disposal 370760 lbs $ 0.03 $ 11,323.94 15 Removal of Solar Modules 11,960 EA $ 5.00 $ 59,800.00 16 Removal of String Inverters 36 EA $ 1,000.00 $ 36,000.00 17 Removal of Switchgear/Xfmr 2 EA $ 5,000.00 $ 10,000.00 18 Removal of Riser and Interconnection Poles 6 EA $ 1,000.00 $ 6,000.00 19 Removal of SCADA/Aux Panel/Weather Station 1EA $ 200.00 $ 200.00 20 Removal of DC Copper Wire 7,475 lbs $ 2.00 $ 14,950.00 21 Removal of AC Aluminum Wires 9,000 lbs $ 2.00 $ 17,999.88 Total Cost $ 524,041.67 Electrical Infrastructure CIVIL INFRASTRUCTURE Removal and Restoration Costs Includes fence mesh, post framing, concrete foundations, gates, etc. Structural Infrastructure BARR 1 CSG Decommissioning Plan 5.0 Schedule of Salvage Values 6.0 Schedule of Summary Page 4August 29, 2025 QUANTITY UNITS $/UNIT VALUE 1Steel Pile 514280 lbs $ 0.10 $ 50,142.30 2Steel Racking 370760 lbs $ 0.10 $ 36,149.10 QUANTITY UNITS $/UNIT VALUE 6DC Copper Wires 7,475 lbs $ 1.10 $ 8,222.50 7AC Aluminum Wires 9,000 lbs $ 0.62 $ 5,579.96 Total $ 100,093.86 Structural Infrastructure Electrical Infrastructure Salvage Values Description Cost Units Decommissioning Estimate (DE) $524,041.67 $ Factor of Safety (FoS)1.075 DE with FoS $563,344.80 $ Average Inflation rate 2.50%% Time Period 35 Years Total Cost with FoS and Inflation after Time Period $1,072,575.14 $ Summary MAYBERRY TRAIL N ACCESS SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 FOR TOPOGRAPHIC DATA S89°20'28"E 2555.12 S1°56'57"W 151.00 S89°20'28"E 65.01 S1 ° 5 6 ' 5 7 " W 1 1 6 7 . 9 3 N89°18'00"W 2129.38 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 5 8 7 . 0 8 EX C E P T I O N EX C E P T I O N N89°18'00"W 483.55 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 7 2 9 . 8 2 Parcel ID: 20.032.20.24.0002 Owner Name: Dean D Barr Parcel ID: 20.032.20.22.0005 Owner Name: Scandia Trail Solar LLC Pa r c e l I D : 2 0 . 0 3 2 . 2 0 . 2 3 . 0 0 0 3 Ow n e r N a m e : L e o M M o n z e l Pa r c e l I D : 2 0 . 0 3 2 . 2 0 . 2 3 . 0 0 0 2 Ow n e r N a m e : J e f f e r y & H a y l e y L u n d Pa r c e l I D : 2 0 . 0 3 2 . 2 0 . 2 4 . 0 0 0 2 Ow n e r N a m e : D e a n D B a r r Parcel ID: 20.032.20.24.0001 Owner Name: Duane D & Deborah L Jereczek FD. CAST IRON MONUMENT NW CORNER OF THE NW 1/4 SEC. 20, TWP 32N, RGE 20W FD. IRON PIN FD. IRON PIN FD. CAST IRON MONUMENT SW CORNER OF THE NW 1/4 SEC. 20, TWP 32N, RGE 20W FD. IRON PIN FD. IRON PIN FD. IRON PIN FD. IRON PIN FD. IRON PIN 33.4 2025-084 BARR I SOLAR 1 OF 2 1522 Mayberry Trail North Marine on St. Croix, Minnesota Washington County, MN BOUNDARY SURVEY JM/ZE VZ DC © 20 2 5 E V S , I N C . SHEET NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY FIELD CREW PROJECT # PROJECT CLIENT SCALE LOCATION SHEET NAME EVS, Inc. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952.646.0236 www.evs-eng.com # DATE DESCRIPTION LOCATION MAP 1" = 5000' FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT FOUND IRON PIPE UTILITY POLE SIGN (AS NOTED) GUY WIRE FENCE TREE LINE WOVEN WIRE FENCE LEGEND CONTROL POINT PER DOCUMENT NO. 4373281 FILED IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA PUBLIC RECORDS. THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT THREE (3), EXCEPT THE NORTH 151 FEET, IN SECTION TWENTY (20), TOWNSHIP THIRTY-TWO (32), RANGE TWENTY (20), LYING NORTH AND WEST OF THE TOWNSHIP ROAD PRESENTLY RUNNING OVER AND ACROSS SAID TRACT, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA. AND THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 32 NORTH, RANGE 20 WEST, WASHINGTON COUNTY, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE EAST 65.00 FEET OF THE NORTH 151.00 FEET AND ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 483.50 FEET OF THE SOUTH 587.00 FEET THEREOF, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED THIS BOUNDARY SURVEY WAS DONE WITHOUT BENEFIT OF A TITLE COMMITMENT. NOT ALL ENCUMBRANCES, EASEMENTS OR OTHER ITEMS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY MAY NOT BE SHOWN. REFERENCES SURVEY NOTES 1)All distances shown hereon are in U.S. Survey feet and tenths or hundredths of a U.S. Survey foot and Angular units are shown in degrees (°), minutes (') and seconds (''). 2)The purpose of this survey is for the proposed development, not all improvements of the subject property are shown hereon. For the purposes of this survey the West line of the Northwest Quarter (1/4) of Section 20, Township 32N, Range 20W with an assumed bearing of N1°38'16"E. BASIS OF BEARING Horizontal: Minnesota DOT for Washington County, Minnesota, US Survey Foot. Vertical: Minnesota DOT Monument EKO MNDT AZ MK - NAVD88 Geoid:Geoid18 Conus Benchmark: MnDOT EKO MNDT AZ MK Northing:285012.63 Easting: 487543.814 Elevation:988.38 Feet NAVD88 Site Control:Point Number 5002 Northing:282815.25 Easting: 490838.27 Elevation:987.78 Feet NAVD88 Desc:Set Iron Pipe with Cap Marked "EVS" Site Control:Point Number 5010 Northing:282419.28 Easting: 490833.18 Elevation:987.24 Feet NAVD88 Desc:Set Mag Nail DATUMS CERTIFICATION: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. _______________________________________________ SCOTT ALWIN REGISTRATION NUMBER: 53528 DATE: 07.07.2025 SITE REVIEW COPY 12" CMP ELEV= 981.79 12" CMP ELEV= 985.09 12" CMP ELEV= 984.98 TREELINE ±30' HEIGHT TR E E L I N E ±3 0 ' H E I G H T TR E E L I N E ±3 0 ' H E I G H T TR E E L I N E ±3 0 ' H E I G H T GRAVEL DRIVE MAYBERRY TRAIL N BARBED WIRE FENCE CHAIN LINK FENCES89°20'28"E 2555.12 N89°18'00"W 2129.38 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 5 8 7 . 0 8 N89°18'00"W 483.55 N1 ° 3 8 ' 1 6 " E 7 2 9 . 8 2 ASPHALT SURFACE SE P T I C S Y S T E M TR E E L I N E ±3 0 ' H E I G H T TR E E L I N E ±3 0 ' H E I G H T TR E E L I N E ±3 0 ' H E I G H T GRAVEL DRIVE EXISTING SOLAR SITE 33.4 CHAIN LINK FENCE 2025-084 BARR I SOLAR 2 OF 2 1522 Mayberry Trail North Marine on St. Croix, Washington County, MN TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY JM/ZE VZ DC A B C D E 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © 20 2 5 E V S , I N C . SHEET NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY FIELD CREW PROJECT # PROJECT CLIENT SCALE LOCATION SHEET NAME EVS, Inc. 10025 Valley View Road, Suite 140 Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Phone: 952.646.0236 www.evs-eng.com # DATE DESCRIPTION LOCATION MAP 1" = 5000' Horizontal: Minnesota DOT for Washington County, Minnesota, US Survey Foot. Vertical: Minnesota DOT Monument EKO MNDT AZ MK - NAVD88 Site Benchmarks: CP 5002 - A set iron pipe with red cap marked "EVS" Northing = 282,815.26 Easting = 490,838.28 Elevation = 987.78 feet (NAVD88) CP 5010 - A set Mag Nail Northing = 282,419.28 Easting = 490,833.18 Elevation = 987.25 feet (NAVD88) DATUMS FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT FOUND IRON PIPE UTILITY POLE SIGN (AS NOTED) GUY WIRE MAJOR CONTOUR INTERVAL FENCE (AS NOTED) MINOR CONTOUR INTERVAL TREE LINE WOVEN WIRE FENCE LEGEND CONTROL POINT SITE EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION New Energy Equity (NEE) is committed to the safety and health of all of our workers and contract personnel, and visitors to our sites and work locations. Our continuing objective to provide safe work conditions and practices at all our work locations is our highest priority. We acknowledge the right all workers have to a safe and healthy work environment. Since each emergency is unique, it is impossible to envision every potential event or combination of events that might contribute to, or result in, an emergency. This Emergency Response Plan (ERP) is based on an all-hazards approach that provides the flexibility to adapt to emergency regardless of the origin. This plan provides both a management and operational structure that identifies the functional relationship that must exist to ensure effective identification, response, and recovery from an emergency. Good judgment and common sense are critical in effective responses to emergency situations. SECTION 2: OBJECTIVE The objective of the ERP is to detail practices designed to address potential impacts from construction and operations of s NEE community solar garden project. (Project). This ERP plan provides guidance to construction, operations, contractors, and field personal on measures to minimize effects during construction and operations activities associated with the Project. This ERP is to assist employees, sub-contractors, contractors, suppliers, and management in making quality decisions during times of crisis. This plan contains guidance in determining the appropriate actions to be undertaken to prevent injury and property loss from the occurrence of major incidents or accidents. This document acts as a guideline in the event of an emergency. The steps described may not occur in the same order, good judgment and common sense are critical for effective emergency response. The ERP is intended to minimize hazards to human health and safety and to the environment from fire, explosion, or any unexpected sudden or non-sudden release of hazardous materials constituents to the air, soil, surface, or groundwater, and natural or human disasters. This plan will serve as the emergency action guide for employees, contractors, and visitors in the event of an emergency. Section 2.1 Emergency Response Plan (ERP) The following text includes standard language included in NEE contracts regarding emergency response. These measures may be modified in the final POD to include measures specifically designed for the project. NOTICE: This attachment is intended to be an overview of NEE’s or contractors’ emergency response requirements and is not intended to be a comprehensive or exhaustive list. This attachment is not intended to supersede or replace Contractor’s obligations to comply with (and ensure Contractor Representatives comply with) all applicable laws, all reasonable directions and orders given by representatives of NEE RE, and all other guidelines, rules, and procedures of NEE that may be given to Contractor from time to time, including without limitation, safety and health standards, policies, and procedures resulting from a pre-job risk assessment, amendments by NEE RE, or amendments resulting from changes in applicable laws. SECTION 3: SETTING AND SITE ACCESS INCLUDING EMERGENCY ACCESS Direct access to the site will be provided by the Kloeckner Road. There would be no need for internal access roads within the project site. The access would be constructed to allow fire and maintenance vehicle access. SECTION 4: EMERGENCY RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS Section 4.1 Regulatory Compliance NEE and contractors will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local emergency response laws, regulations, and standards. NEE and contractors using good judgment, common sense, experience, and knowledge will identify such additional emergency response preparation as may be required to be performed safely. Section 4.2 Emergency Coordinator Before on-site services begin, NEE will ensure contractor(s) assign a designated emergency response coordinator, qualified by experience and/or education, is assigned for all services taking place. This person will be dedicated to managing the implementation of the emergency response plan, emergency response and may have additional project functions provided they do not interfere with the effective implementation of the program. Section 4.3 Competent and Qualified Persons NEE will ensure contractor(s) employ a “competent person” and/or “qualified person” capable of carrying out an effective emergency response preparation plan. Such person(s) will have the authority to take prompt corrective actions. Contractor(s) will provide NEE with the name and contact information of the assigned person(s) and/or any changes in the assignment. Section 4.4 Fire Safety Plan (FSP) NEE will ensure contractor(s) develop a Fire Safety Plan (FSP) that describes how the contractor will safely provide contractor’s services. Content of the plan will address regulatory compliance and any additional health and safety measures as may be required for the contractor’s services to be performed safely. A copy of the contractor’s FSP will be provided to NEE prior to the start of on-site work. Section 4.5 Emergency Response Plan (ERP) Contractor(s) will develop a written final Emergency Response Plan (ERP) in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local emergency response regulations and standards. Contractor(s) will include the Emergency Response Plan in contractor’s Project Safety Plan. Contractor(s) will train all contractor representatives on the provisions of the Emergency Response Plan. The final ERP would be specific to the final site layout and location of site components and implemented to provide an integrated procedure for response to oil and hazardous materials spills, plant evacuation, medical/fire/law enforcement, and severe weather emergencies. The final ERP would be consistent with applicable laws and regulations governing such emergencies. Section 4.6 Health and Safety Program Health and Safety Training is an important part of the final ERP. To ensure the instructions contained within the final ERP are properly followed during site/facility emergencies, a training program is to be developed and training provided to all employees, upon hire and after any changes in site/facility operations or layout. All staff to intervene in emergency situations that could affect their health or safety must receive training before undertaking their duties. The training must include exercises appropriate to the work site that simulate the potential emergencies identified in the final ERP. Section 4.6 Fire Prevention Listed below are specific procedures that shall be addressed by the site to minimize the occurrence of and impact from a fire emergency. Fire prevention is the responsibility of all personnel. Employees should follow safe practices to minimize fire hazards, and supervisors must ensure safe practices are followed daily. • Contractor(s) will include the Fire Safety Plan (FSP) in contractor’s ERP. Contractor(s) will train all contractor representatives on the provisions of the FSP. The FSP would be consistent with applicable laws and regulations governing such emergencies. • All fire protection equipment will be inspected monthly by the Emergency Coordinator. All areas at each site/facility will be inspected monthly to check for unsafe conditions, such as blocked or locked fire exits, poor housekeeping, smoking in non-designated areas, flammable/combustible materials not stored properly and obstructed access to electrical rooms and panels, etc. • The Project operator and or EPC contractor shall present basic fire-prevention training to all personnel working at the project site, and shall maintain documentation of all training and implement the following: • All employees, contractors, and employees of contractors to do everything reasonable within their power, expertise, and assessment of human safety both independently and upon request of the County and the local fire department to prevent and suppress fires resulting from Project construction or maintenance activities on the lands to be occupied under this permit. In case of fire suppressed by the operator, the operator will report its occurrence to the County and the local fire department. The operator is responsible for all suppression costs and resource damage rehabilitation costs resulting from the suppression of any fire resulting from its operations and practices. • The operator is responsible to ensure that each employee, subcontractor, or any other individual or company working on the project site is aware of the provisions of this fire plan, is familiar with the location and proper use of firefighting equipment and conducts themselves in a fire-safe manner. • No material will be disposed of by burning in open fires. • Exhaust systems of vehicles will have an acceptable muffler and will be in proper working condition. All motorized equipment and machinery will be equipped with spark arresters. o Vehicles will be parked only in cleared areas. o All smoking will be done only inside of vehicles or in areas cleared of flammable material. o Fuels and flammable materials, if required, will be stored in accordance with the Hazardous Materials Plan and in accordance with all applicable state and federal laws. o The proposed solar plant site shall be equipped with fire extinguishers and other equipment sufficient to extinguish small fires. o Welding operations are subject to the following additional provisions o There will be no welding when winds are over 15 miles per hour; and o Welding will occur only in areas cleared of all flammable vegetation and materials at a minimum radius of 30 feet from the welding operation. o Fire rules shall be posted on the project bulletin board at the contractor’s field office and areas visible to employees. All construction workers, plant personnel, and maintenance workers visiting the plant and/or transmission lines to perform maintenance activities shall receive training on the procedures to be followed in the event of a fire. Training records shall be maintained and be available for review by the County and the local fire department. o Local fire agencies shall have access to the solar farm site. Access gates shall be a minimum of 12 feet to allow fire access. o Minimize fire risk by removing vegetation. Measures to minimize fire risk shall include removal of dry vegetation, or equipment/vehicle that has the potential to spark a fire. In the event of an emergency, immediate notification must be easily available for employees. In all circumstances regarding emergencies whether a specific incident such as an individual, to a serious or facility wide emergency incident, the preferred means of notification is through the immediate Supervisor who will then notify the operator so that he/she may make an announcement to the whole site. In situations where site- wide announcements are not available, notification will occur by phone or radio, or other site- specific method. Section 4.7 Emergency Response In the event of an emergency response, the following measures will be conducted by the individual discovering the emergency. First, personnel will assess the situation to determine potential safety concerns and hazards posed to personnel and the environment. Protective actions for life safety are the priority. All personnel will be moved or evacuated to a safe location. Access will be prohibited to the affected area to other employees or contractors. The final ERP will include a site-specific evacuation plan and a shelter in place plan. The second priority is the stabilization of the incident. Anyone who witnesses an unusual situation that cannot be corrected routinely must notify their supervisor immediately and, while respecting the jurisdiction and ability, he/she must take the necessary measures to control the situation until the arrival of the Emergency Coordinator or supervisor. Section 4.8 Emergency Reporting The construction contractor will notify NEE construction supervisor and environmental monitor of any emergencies immediately. NEE will notify federal, state, and local authorities, as appropriate. If an emergency threatens public or worker health: • The contractor will make appropriate notification(s) to emergency personnel. o Emergency: 911 ATTACHMENT A: SAMPLE EMERGENCY RESPONSE FORM A-1 CERTIFICATIONS, ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, AND DESIGNATION OF EMERGENCY COORDINATOR The Construction Contractor(s) responsible for managing the material yards shall complete and submit the following information: GENERAL INFORMATION Business Name Facility Street Address ( ) City County Zip Code Phone Mailing Address (if different) ( ) City County Zip Code Phone EMERGENCY COORDINATOR ( ) ( ) ( ) Primary Emergency Coordinator Business Phone 24-hour Phone Pager/Cellular Phone ( ) ( ) ( ) 1st Alternate Business Phone 24-hour Phone Pager/Cellular Phone ( ) ( ) ( ) 2nd Alternate Business Phone 24-hour Phone Pager/Cellular Phone A-2 EMERGENCY CHECKLIST ** DIAL 911 FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE** Contractor Telephone Number Address EMERGENCY NUMBERS Emergency Response (Ambulance, Fire, Police, Sheriff, Highway Patrol) call 911 Poison Control Center Phone: __________________________ Nearest Hospitals (2) Phone: Phone: Cleanup Contractor Phone: Other (specify) Phone: Other (specify) Phone: AGENCY NOTIFICATIONS (to be made by the Proponent’s environmental manager or environmental field supervisor or emergency response coordinator) Other (specify) Phone #: Other (specify) Phone # Note: The Construction Contractor(s) shall verify and update the emergency numbers on this page before and during Project construction Emergency Coordinator: ( ) ( ) (day phone) (night phone) First Alternate: ( ) ( ) (day phone) (night phone) Second Alternate: ( ) ( ) (day phone) (night phone) I. EMERGENCY RESPONSE EQUIPMENT MONTHLY INSPECTION A/U Shovels Absorbent material Personal protective equipment (Tyvek suit, gloves, goggles and booties, as appropriate) Fire-fighting equipment in good working condition First aid supplies (e.g., medical supplies, squeeze bottle eye wash) Communication equipment Bung wrench (non-sparking) II. EMEGENCY RESPONSE ACTIONS TAKEN REPORT (Required for all unacceptable conditions) Date: Company (print): Inspected by (print): Signature: SITE RULES NEE will use commercially reasonable efforts to follow and to cause its personnel to follow the following rules while on the Premises. Lessor may bar further access to the Premises by any individual who commits repeated, material violations of these rules after such individual has received at least three written warnings of a particular material violation from Lessor describing, and including reasonable evidence documenting, such material violation. In addition, any individual violating rules (d)(i), (iv), or (vi) at least three times after receipt of a third written warning with documented evidence of such violation, will be immediately expelled from the Premises and will be banned from the Premises thereafter. The rules are as follows: a) When not in active use by NEE, all access gates, as well as all interior gates, will remain closed at all times. b) Smoking is prohibited except in designated construction areas and in vehicles. NEE will employ reasonable precautions to prevent fires and will be responsible for all damage caused by NEE. c) NEE will keep the Premises clean and free of debris created by NEE, its contractors, or others brought on to the Premises by NEE. NEE will not use the Premises for storage of items that are not related to, used or to be used in connection with, or for the benefit of all or a portion of the Project. d) At no time will any of employees of NEE bring any of the following onto the Premises: i. weapons of any type, including but not limited to, guns, bows and arrows, or sling shots; ii. animal calling devices; iii. fishing equipment or nets; iv. dogs, cats or any other animals; v. alcoholic beverages; vi. illegal drugs or related paraphernalia. e) NEE, its employees, contractors, agents and any individual allowed onto the Premises by NEE will use reasonable efforts to confine their activities on the Premises to the designated access routes and to the areas upon which operations are then being conducted. f) No wood, plants, animals (dead or alive), antlers, artifacts or any other item that was not originally brought onto the Premises by NEE personnel will be removed from the Premises by such personnel, except that NEE can burn, remove and clear wood, plants and brush on the Premises. g) A speed limit of 25 miles per hour (15 miles per hour at night) will be strictly observed while using roads on the Premises. h) This Agreement does not cover or include any right or privilege of hunting or fishing on the Premises, all such rights being expressly reserved to Lessor. ABOUT NEW ENERGY EQUITY New Energy Equity, an ALLETE company, is a national end-to-end solar development and finance company, having successfully completed more than 250 projects totaling more than 330 megawatts across the United States. Our focus is on developing, financing, operating and managing solar power generation assets, providing clean electricity to commercial, industrial, municipal, and utility customers. We have ranked on Solar Power World’s “Top Solar Contractors” list every year since its inception and were voted one of the fastest-growing energy companies in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia by Inc. Magazine. THE NEW ENERGY ADVANTAGE A Personal Approach When you partner with us, you'll receive a tailored approach and our commitment of integrity, ingenuity, dedication, and diligence, so that we thrive and succeed together. We pride ourselves on developing lasting relationships with the landowners we work with and their local communities. A Proven Track Record NEE has a proven track record of completing a much higher percentage of our projects than our competitors. Last year alone we developed more than 50 community solar projects across the US. Solar Development Expertise Our team includes experts in all aspects of solar projects including development, engineering, land acquisition, program management, legal diligence, construction, and financing. We share a dedication to clean energy and the nation’s energy transformation. SHARING THE BENEFITS OF SOLAR With increased solar panel efficiency, lower install costs, and the opportunity for energy bill savings, the solar industry is the fastest growing renewable energy industry in the world. Entire communities can benefit from solar too, with community solar projects. Offering electricity savings for everyone, community solar projects utilize otherwise unused land by sharing the power generated between all residents. Level 2 Wetland Delineation Report MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Washington County, Minnesota Prepared for: MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 2530 Riva Road STE 200 Annapolis, MD 21401 Prepared by: Area M Consulting, LLC Environmental Consultants 2023 Alameda Street Roseville, MN 55113 www.areamconsulting.com May 2025 AREAM AREAM J [Page Intentionally Left Blank] AREAM I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, this wetland delineation and report were completed following current wetland standards as set forth by the USACE and BWSR. Findings in this report represent Area M’s best judgement based on conditions and information available at the time of the wetland delineation. _________________________________________________ Jonathan Knudsen, WDC, MS Principal Biologist/Wetland Specialist MN Certified Wetland Delineator 1307 MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 i AREAM TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 1 OFF-SITE REVIEW .............................................................................................................................. 1 FIELD DELINEATION ......................................................................................................................... 2 RESULTS and RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 4 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 7 TABLES Table 1. Study Area precipitation data. ................................................................................................... 3 APPENDICES Appendix A. Maps Appendix B: FEMA Firmette Appendix C: Soils Report - Hydric Rating by Soils Unit and Hydric Soil List – All components Appendix D: Aerial Imagery Slides Appendix E: Wetland Hydrology from Aerial Imagery – Recording Form - Exhibits 1 & 2 Appendix F: Field Photos Appendix G: Wetland Data Forms Appendix H: MNRAM MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 1 AREAM INTRODUCTION Area M Consulting (Area M) conducted a wetland delineation for the MN CSG 2019-69 LLC (Project) located within Washington County, Minnesota. The Area M biologist conducted a routine Level 2 Delineation, as defined by the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), within the entire Project boundaries following procedures and methods outlined by the United States Army Core of Engineers (USACE) Wetland Delineation Manual (USACE, 1987), Northcentral and Northeast Regional Supplement (USACE, 2012), and BWSR Guidance for Offsite Hydrology/Wetland Determinations (2016). This wetland delineation report is assembled to inform design and to assist the Client with meeting regulatory requirements necessary for permitting a community solar garden (CSG) in Washington County. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project, encompassing 80.1 acres, is located west of Scandia, MN in Section 20, T32N:R20W (Study Area) (Appendix A, Map 1 & 2). The Study Area includes a rolling, agricultural field with several minor depressions and hills. Three north-south shelterbelts divide the Study Area into crop fields. These fields are typically cropped with a corn/soybean rotation. An existing solar facility bounds the northern edge of the Study Area. A wetland is present 140 feet to the east of the Project, within the same parcel. Although this wetland is outside of the Project, it was delineated and included in this report due to set-back rules in Washington County. Big Marine Lake is located 620 feet to the southeast. The surrounding landscape is a mosaic of farmland, wooded hillsides, lakes, and residential/commercial buildings associated with Forest Lake and Scandia. OFF-SITE REVIEW Prior to fieldwork, Area M conducted a comprehensive desktop review of data sources available within the public domain to identify the presence/absence and extent of wetlands that could occur within the Study Area. Areas with hydric signatures, suggesting potential wetland conditions, were evaluated in greater detail during the field investigation. The following data sources were reviewed; the analysis of each data set is discussed in greater detail later in this section.  Hydrologic soil data  Antecedent precipitation data  Mapped Wetlands/Waterbodies ▪ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) ▪ MNDNR updated NWI ▪ MNDNR Public Waters Inventory (PWI) ▪ National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)  Elevation Data ▪ MN Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) Data MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 2 AREAM ▪ United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps Mapped Wetland Data The NWI (USFWS, 2025), MN NWI update (MNDNR, 2025a), PWI (MNDNR, 2023b), and NHD data sets were reviewed for the presence of mapped wetlands and/or waterbodies within the Study Area. No aquatic features within these datasets intersect the Study Area (Appendix A, Map 3). The FEMA dataset was also reviewed for areas of high flood risk. No high flood risk areas intersect the Study Area (Appendix B). Soils The Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2025) was accessed to summarize mapped soil types which occur within the Study Area. The entire Study Area is comprised of non-hydric soil units (Appendix A). The full list of hydric soils components and attributes is presented in Appendix C. Topographic Data Elevation and topographic data from the USGS and MNDNR were reviewed within the Study Area to identify potential basins and depressional areas which could be indicative of wetlands. The Study Area includes a rolling agricultural landscape with several closed depressions. The Project slopes southeast, overall, towards Big Marine Lake and some associated wetlands (Appendix A). The total topographic relief of the Study Area is approximately 24 feet. Historic Aerial Photography Review Historic aerial photographs were analyzed for hydric signatures in conjunction with antecedent precipitation, following the procedures outlined in the Guidance for Offsite Hydrology/Wetland Determinations (BWSR and USACE 2016). Upon review, seven areas (Areas 1-7) showing potential wetland signatures in the historic imagery was identified within the Study Area; these areas correspond to the concave landforms in the cropped portion of the Study Area (Appendix D). Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2, which summarize the data reviewed for the offsite evaluation, are presented in Appendix E. Based on the Decision Matrix in Exhibit 2, wetlands are absent from the Study Area. Off-site Summary Overall, the off-site review suggests wetlands are absent from the Study Area (Appendix A). However, the wetland to the east of the Project was delineated and evaluated. The entire Study Area was investigated in greater detail during the field survey. FIELD DELINEATION Methodology Suspected wetlands identified during the off-site analysis were investigated in the field using routine on- site delineation methods in accordance with the USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACE, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Northcentral and Northeastern Region (Version 2.0) (USACE, 2010). This included the characterization of vegetation, soils, and hydrology on-site. Wetlands are defined by the USACE as “areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 3 AREAM do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.” For an area to be delineated as a regulated wetland, the vegetative, hydrologic, and soil characteristics must all be present and consistent with federal and state classification criteria. Transects were established in representative transition zones, perpendicular between suspected wetland and upland areas. Survey Points were recorded along each transect, moving from upland to wetland to identify the wetland boundary. Wetland criteria were evaluated at each Survey Point and a Wetland Determination Form – Northcentral and Northeast Region (Form) was completed. Additional Survey Points were collected within unique vegetation communities (if present) to document and characterize baseline hydrology, soils, and vegetation within the Study Area. Wetlands were classified using the Hydrogeomorphic Classification System (HGM). Plant communities were classified using Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and Wisconsin system (Eggers and Reed, 1997). The entire Study Area was surveyed in the field to confirm the absence of additional wetlands. The location and boundaries of wetland features identified by Area M during field surveys were recorded in the field using a Trimble Geoexplorer 6000 which typically achieves accuracy within 2 feet. A map depicting wetland boundaries, survey points, and transects is included in Appendix A. Representative photographs of the Study Area are included in Appendix F. Field Forms are included in Appendix G. The off-site wetland (Wetland 1) was also evaluated through the sunset Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MNRAM) per request by Washington County, to apply a construction off-set based on wetland quality. This evaluation was conducted using the BWSR Excel tool. Antecedent Precipitation Analysis Antecedent Precipitation conditions were evaluated using the NRCS Method for Evaluating Antecedent Moisture Conditions. Data from the Minnesota Climatology Working Group and Natural Resources Conservation Service. WETS Tables suggest moisture conditions were normal during the field survey on May 19, 2025 (Table 1). These conditions were taken into consideration when conducting the delineation. Table 1. Study Area precipitation data. Field Conditions Area M conducted the field delineation on May 19, 2025. Field conditions were cool, with light rain falling. The temperature was approximately 70 degrees Fahrenheit and cloudy with minimal wind. The agricultural field was plowed at the time of the survey. Value First Prior Month April Second Prior Month March Third Prior Month February estimated precipitation total for this location: 2.66 2.93 0.77 30% chance this location will have less than: 2.05 1.09 0.60 30% chance this location will have more than: 3.35 2.06 1.21 type of month normal wet normal monthly score 3 * 2 = 6 2 * 3 = 6 1 * 2 = 2 Multi-Month Score: 14 (Normal) MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 4 AREAM Field Review Summary Based upon this routine Level 2 Wetland Delineation, it is the professional opinion of Area M that wetlands are absent from the Study Area (Appendix A). However, a large, off-site wetland (Wetland 1) was mapped and evaluated Wetland 1: Depression - Wet Meadow/Wooded Swamp/Seasonally Flooded Basin/Shallow Marsh – 14.17 acres Wetland 1, a large wetland associated with Big Marine Lake to the south, is located approximately 150 feet east of the Study Area. The wetland, contained within a well-defined basin, consists of wet meadow, seasonally flooded basin, wooded swamp, and shallow marsh components, typically transitioning in that order from outside to inside. The wetland fringe is typically well defined throughout the wetland boundary, at the toe slope of a pronounced bench with distinct vegetation. A small embankment and culvert, supplied by additional drainage tile, crossed the northwestern portion of the wetland. At Sampling Point 1-1 and 2-1, in the wooded swamp and seasonally flooded basin components of Wetland 1, the plant community was hydrophytic and dominated by reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), elm (Ulmus americana), boxelder (Acer negundo), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), and jewelweed (Impatiens capensis). Soils were hydric, with high muck and organic material components (A10). Soils were saturated to the surface at the toe slope and the water table was observed within 10 inches (A2, A3). Two secondary hydrology indicators were present: FAC-Neutral Test (D5) and Geomorphic Position (D2). In the adjacent upland, at Sampling Point SP 1-2, and 2-2 soils were non-hydric and very distinct from those found in the basin. Wetland hydrology indicators were also not observed. The plant community in the upland was non-hydric and dominated by boxelder, red oak (Quercus rubra), iron wood (Ostrya virginiana), geranium (Geranium maculatum), and trillium (Trillium grandiflorum). Wetland 1 was mapped by following the slight to pronounced topographic transition between concave and convex landforms, coupled with transition between distinct, wetland and upland vegetation. Wetland 1 functional ratings through the MNRAM evaluation were varied (Appendix E). Vegetation and Recreation scored lowest, while Hydrology was the sole High category. Wetland 1 scored as a Manage 1wetland based on the Wetland Management Classification System criteria, solely based on its Medium rating for Amphibian habitat. Area 1 – Upland Area 1, identified during off-site review, is a small depression located in the cropped field. Only 2 of the 9 slides with normal antecedent precipitation showed wetland signatures (2 of 20 overall). At SP 3, in the center of the feature, soils were non hydric and wetland hydrology indicators were not observed. The plant community was not evaluated or used as wetland criteria due to cropping. Area 1 was determined to be upland. Area 2 – Upland MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 5 AREAM Area 2, identified during off-site review, is a small depression located in the cropped field. Only 1 of the 9 slides with normal antecedent precipitation showed wetland signatures (3 of 20 overall). At SP 4, in the center of the feature, soils were non hydric and wetland hydrology indicators were not observed. The plant community was not evaluated or used as wetland criteria due to cropping. Area 2 was determined to be upland. Area 3 – Upland Area 3, identified during off-site review, is a small depression located on the northern margin of the Study Area. Zero of the 9 slides with normal antecedent precipitation showed wetland signatures (0 of 20 overall). Area 3 was determined to be upland. Area 4 – Upland Area 4, identified during off-site review, is a small depression located on the northern margin of the Study Area. Only 1 of the 9 slides with normal antecedent precipitation showed wetland signatures (2 of 20 overall). Area 4 was determined to be upland. Area 5 – Upland Area 5, identified during off-site review, is a small depression located in the cropped field. Only 4 of the 9 slides with normal antecedent precipitation showed wetland signatures (5 of 20 overall). At SP 5, in the center of the feature, soils were non hydric and wetland hydrology indicators were not observed. The plant community was not evaluated or used as wetland criteria due to cropping. Area 5 was determined to be upland. Area 6 – Upland Area 6, identified during off-site review, is a small depression located in a closed depression in the east- central portion of the Study Area. Only 2 of the 9 slides with normal antecedent precipitation showed wetland signatures (2 of 20 overall). Area 6 was determined to be upland. Area 7– Upland Area 7, identified during off-site review, is a small depression located in the southeastern corner of the Study Area. Only 2 of the 8 slides with normal antecedent precipitation showed wetland signatures (2 of 19 overall). Area 7 was determined to be upland. RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon this routine Level 2 Wetland Delineation, it is the professional opinion of Area M that the Study Area does not contain features that satisfy the criteria to be wetlands pursuant to the Army Corps of Engineers' 1987 Manual with subsequent clarification memoranda and pursuant to confirmation by the USACE (Appendix A). However, Wetland 1, adjacent to the Study Area, was delineated and evaluated. Activities impacting wetlands and waterways are regulated through both the Local Government Unit (LGU) and USACE, which administers the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and Clean Water Act (CWA), respectively. The wetlands and wetland boundaries described within this report are described based on the MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 6 AREAM conditions in the field at the time of the survey and subject to verification by state, federal, and local agencies, which have final authority over wetland presence, extent, and jurisdictional status. MN CSG 2019-69 LLC Level 2 Wetland Delineation May 2025 7 AREAM REFERENCES Board of Water and Soil Resources. 2010. Wetland Conservation Act: Choosing the Appropriate Method. BWSR Technical Guidance July 1, 2010. BWSR and USACE. 2016. Guidance for Offsite Hydrology/Wetland Determination. St. Paul District. Eggers, Steve D., and Donald M. Reed. 1997. Wetland plants and communities of Minnesota and Wisconsin. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District. Jamestown, ND: Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corp of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetlands Research Program. Technical Report Y-87-1. Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, US Army Corp of Engineers. Vicksburg, Mississippi, USA. Environmental Laboratory. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi, USA. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2016. Web Soil Survey. (United States Department of Agriculture) Retrieved from http://www.websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2025a. National Wetland Inventory Update: Wetlands online map viewer. Downloaded from: http://mndnr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/OnePane/basicviewer/index.html Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2025b. Public Waters Inventory Shapefiles. Downloaded from: https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-mn-public-waters Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR). 2025c. MN State Climatology Website. MNDNR Ecological and Water Resources Division. State Climatology Office. Retrieved from: http://climate.umn.edu/gridded_data/precip/monthly/monthly_gridded_precip.asp United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2025. National Wetland Inventory: Wetlands Online Mapper. Retrieved from http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.HTML AREAM Appendix A: Maps T33 R19WT33 R20WT33 R21W T32 R21W T32 R19W T32 R20W T31 R21W T31 R20W T31 R19W 17171618151514161713141813 2120 2019222322212024242319 2829 27 29302726282925263025 32 33 32 343432 31333635313536 5 4 3 5 632125461 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 11 12 7910 17 16 1415 13 18 18 17 16 14 1315 20 23 242122 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 2829 27 26 25 30 30 29 25262827 3635323334 31 32 33 34 35 31 36 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 61 10989 11101112 1287 7 1617 15 14 16 15 1413 13 18 1718 17 2322 2221 19 20 232124 241920 27 27 262629 30282825253029 29 07 20 05 19 29 32 08 08 18 06 29 19 32 20 17 30 07 17 30 06 18 31 05 County of Polk County, Washington County, MN, (sri, H(R(, *armin, INCR(M(NT P, N*A, 8S*S Map 1. Location MapMN CSG 2019-69 LLC Project Location Study Area 1-Mile Buffer 5-Mile Buffer County Boundary Township Boundary Section Boundary Isanti Anoka Hennepin Chisago Wright Carver Washington Sherburne Dakota Ramsey Mille Lacs Pine Polk St. Croix Pierce Burnett Sources: (sri, *armin, 8S*S, NPS Washington County, MN 34.7 Acres S20 T32N:R20W 45.247949 Lat -92.868819 Long 0 5,000 10,0002,500 Feet AREAM 1:100,000 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed Map 2. 1:24,000 Topographic MapMN CSG 2019-69 LLC Project Site 0.5-Mile Buffer County BoundaryWashington County, MN 0 1,000 2,000500Feet AREAM 1:24,000 AE Ma[ar, MiFrosoIt 0 160 32080Feet Map 3. Wetland Resources MapMN CSG 2019-69 LLC Study Area NHD Flowline NHD Waterbody NWI PWI Flowlline PWI Waterbody Floodway 100-Year Floodplain Washington County, MN AREAM 97 0 9 8 0 96 0 950 940 9 9 0 980 9 9 0 980 96 0 950 990 9 9 0 9 9 0 0 60 080)HHW Map 4. Lidar Map 6WXG\$UHD Contour Interval ,QGH[0IW ,QWHUPHGLDWHIW/RZ +LJK AREA0 MN CSG 2019-69 LLC :DVKLQJWRQ&RXQW\01 Wetland 1 SP 1-1 SP 1-2 SP 2-1 SP 2-2 SP 3 SP 4 SP 5 Ma[ar, MicrosoIt 0 250 500125Feet Map 5. Delineation MapMN CSG 2019-69 LLC Study Area Delineated Wetland Upland Sampling Point Wetland Sampling Point Wetland Transect Washington County, AREAM 1:4,750 AREAM Appendix B: FEMA Firmette National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone A, V, A99 With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulatory Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mile Zone X Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone X Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 17.5 Water Surface Elevation Coastal Transect Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 6/2/2025 at 5:15 PM and does not reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS 8 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location. 1:6,000 92°52'33"W 45°15'5"N 92°51'56"W 45°14'40"N Basemap Imagery Source: USGS National Map 2023 AREAM Appendix C: Soils Report Hydric Rating by Soils Unit and Hydric Soil List – All components Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Washington County, Minnesota (MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 1 of 5 50 1 0 2 6 0 50 1 0 3 4 0 50 1 0 4 2 0 50 1 0 5 0 0 50 1 0 5 8 0 50 1 0 6 6 0 50 1 0 7 4 0 50 1 0 2 6 0 50 1 0 3 4 0 50 1 0 4 2 0 50 1 0 5 0 0 50 1 0 5 8 0 50 1 0 6 6 0 50 1 0 7 4 0 509930 510010 510090 510170 510250 510330 510410 510490 510570 510650 509930 510010 510090 510170 510250 510330 510410 510490 510570 510650 45° 15' 0'' N 92 ° 5 2 ' 2 5 ' ' W 45° 15' 0'' N 92 ° 5 1 ' 5 0 ' ' W 45° 14' 44'' N 92 ° 5 2 ' 2 5 ' ' W 45° 14' 44'' N 92 ° 5 1 ' 5 0 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 15N WGS84 0 150 300 600 900 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:3,510 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:15,800. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Washington County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 7, 2024 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jun 29, 2023—Sep 13, 2023 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Washington County, Minnesota (MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 2 of 5 Hydric Rating by Map Unit Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 155B Chetek sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes 0 18.4 52.9% 159B Anoka loamy fine sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes 0 16.4 47.1% Totals for Area of Interest 34.8 100.0% Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Washington County, Minnesota MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 3 of 5 Description This rating indicates the percentage of map units that meets the criteria for hydric soils. Map units are composed of one or more map unit components or soil types, each of which is rated as hydric soil or not hydric. Map units that are made up dominantly of hydric soils may have small areas of minor nonhydric components in the higher positions on the landform, and map units that are made up dominantly of nonhydric soils may have small areas of minor hydric components in the lower positions on the landform. Each map unit is rated based on its respective components and the percentage of each component within the map unit. The thematic map is color coded based on the composition of hydric components. The five color classes are separated as 100 percent hydric components, 66 to 99 percent hydric components, 33 to 65 percent hydric components, 1 to 32 percent hydric components, and less than one percent hydric components. In Web Soil Survey, the Summary by Map Unit table that is displayed below the map pane contains a column named 'Rating'. In this column the percentage of each map unit that is classified as hydric is displayed. Hydric soils are defined by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) as soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (Federal Register, 1994). Under natural conditions, these soils are either saturated or inundated long enough during the growing season to support the growth and reproduction of hydrophytic vegetation. The NTCHS definition identifies general soil properties that are associated with wetness. In order to determine whether a specific soil is a hydric soil or nonhydric soil, however, more specific information, such as information about the depth and duration of the water table, is needed. Thus, criteria that identify those estimated soil properties unique to hydric soils have been established (Federal Register, 2002). These criteria are used to identify map unit components that normally are associated with wetlands. The criteria used are selected estimated soil properties that are described in "Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 1999) and "Keys to Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 2006) and in the "Soil Survey Manual" (Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993). If soils are wet enough for a long enough period of time to be considered hydric, they should exhibit certain properties that can be easily observed in the field. These visible properties are indicators of hydric soils. The indicators used to make onsite determinations of hydric soils are specified in "Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States" (Hurt and Vasilas, 2006). References: Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Washington County, Minnesota MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 4 of 5 Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Percent Present Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Washington County, Minnesota MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 5 of 5 Hydric Soil List - All Components This table lists the map unit components and their hydric status in the survey area. This list can help in planning land uses; however, onsite investigation is recommended to determine the hydric soils on a specific site (National Research Council, 1995; Hurt and others, 2002). The three essential characteristics of wetlands are hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology (Cowardin and others, 1979; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987; National Research Council, 1995; Tiner, 1985). Criteria for all of the characteristics must be met for areas to be identified as wetlands. Undrained hydric soils that have natural vegetation should support a dominant population of ecological wetland plant species. Hydric soils that have been converted to other uses should be capable of being restored to wetlands. Hydric soils are defined by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) as soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (Federal Register, 1994). These soils, under natural conditions, are either saturated or inundated long enough during the growing season to support the growth and reproduction of hydrophytic vegetation. The NTCHS definition identifies general soil properties that are associated with wetness. In order to determine whether a specific soil is a hydric soil or nonhydric soil, however, more specific information, such as information about the depth and duration of the water table, is needed. Thus, criteria that identify those estimated soil properties unique to hydric soils have been established (Federal Register, 2002). These criteria are used to identify map unit components that normally are associated with wetlands. The criteria used are selected estimated soil properties that are described in "Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 1999) and "Keys to Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 2006) and in the "Soil Survey Manual" (Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993). If soils are wet enough for a long enough period of time to be considered hydric, they should exhibit certain properties that can be easily observed in the field. These visible properties are indicators of hydric soils. The indicators used to make onsite determinations of hydric soils are specified in "Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States" (Hurt and Vasilas, 2006). Hydric soils are identified by examining and describing the soil to a depth of about 20 inches. This depth may be greater if determination of an appropriate indicator so requires. It is always recommended that soils be excavated and described to the depth necessary for an understanding of the redoximorphic processes. Then, using the completed soil descriptions, soil scientists can compare the soil features required by each indicator and specify which indicators have been matched with the conditions observed in the soil. The soil can be identified as a hydric soil if at least one of the approved indicators is present. Map units that are dominantly made up of hydric soils may have small areas, or inclusions, of nonhydric soils in the higher positions on the landform, and map units dominantly made up of nonhydric soils may have inclusions of hydric soils in the lower positions on the landform. The criteria for hydric soils are represented by codes in the table (for example, 2). Definitions for the codes are as follows: Hydric Soil List - All Components---Washington County, Minnesota MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 1 of 3 1.All Histels except for Folistels, and Histosols except for Folists. 2.Soils in Aquic suborders, great groups, or subgroups, Albolls suborder, Historthels great group, Histoturbels great group, Pachic subgroups, or Cumulic subgroups that: A.Based on the range of characteristics for the soil series, will at least in part meet one or more Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, or B.Show evidence that the soil meets the definition of a hydric soil; 3.Soils that are frequently ponded for long or very long duration during the growing season. A.Based on the range of characteristics for the soil series, will at least in part meet one or more Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, or B.Show evidence that the soil meets the definition of a hydric soil; 4.Map unit components that are frequently flooded for long duration or very long duration during the growing season that: A.Based on the range of characteristics for the soil series, will at least in part meet one or more Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, or B.Show evidence that the soil meets the definition of a hydric soil; Hydric Condition: Food Security Act information regarding the ability to grow a commodity crop without removing woody vegetation or manipulating hydrology. References: Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. Doc. 2012-4733 Filed 2-28-12. February, 28, 2012. Hydric soils of the United States. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Vasilas, L.M., G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble, editors. Version 7.0, 2010. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. Hydric Soil List - All Components---Washington County, Minnesota MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 2 of 3 Report—Hydric Soil List - All Components Hydric Soil List - All Components–MN163-Washington County, Minnesota Map symbol and map unit name Component/Local Phase Comp. pct. Landform Hydric status Hydric criteria met (code) 155B: Chetek sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes Chetek 80-100 Terraces,outwash plains No — Rosholt 0-10 Terraces,outwash plains No — Mahtomedi 0-5 Terraces,outwash plains No — Scott Lake 0-5 Terraces,outwash plains No — 159B: Anoka loamy fine sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Anoka 90 Outwash plains No — Lino 5 —No — Soderville 5 —No — Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Washington County, Minnesota Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 7, 2024 Hydric Soil List - All Components---Washington County, Minnesota MN_CSG 2019-69 LLC_PA Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/19/2025 Page 3 of 3 AREAM Appendix D: Aerial Imagery Slides AREAM April 1991 May 1992 AREAM June 2003 August 2004 AREAM June 2006 May 2008 AREAM June 2009 May 2010 AREAM April 2012 September 2013 AREAM October 2014 August 2015 AREAM March 2016 April 2017 AREAM April 2018 October 2019 AREAM June 2020 August 2021 AREAM June 2022 September 2023 AREAM Appendix E: Wetland Hydrology from Aerial Imagery – Recording Form Exhibits 1 & 2 Exhibit 1 Field data sheet reference (if applicable): ___________ Wetland Hydrology from Aerial Imagery – Recording Form Project Name:Date:County: Investigator:Legal Description (T, R, S): •Use abovekey to label image interpretations. It is imperative that the reviewer read and understand the guidance associated with the use of these labels. If alternate labels are used, indicate in box above. •If less than five (5) images taken during normal climate conditions are available, use an equal number of images taken during wet and dry climate conditions and use as many images as you have available. Describe the results using this methodology in your report. i Use MN State Climatology website to determine climate conditionwhen imagewas taken. Summary Table Date Image Taken (M-D-Y) Image Source Climate Condition (wet, dry, normal)i Image Interpretation(s) Area: Area: Area: Area: Area: Normal Climate Condition Area: Area: Area: Area: Area: Number Number with wet signatures Percent with wet signatures KEY WS - wetland signature SS - soil wetness signature CS - crop stress NC - not cropped AP - altered pattern NV - normal vegetative cover DO - drowned out SW - standing water NSS – no soil wetness signature Other labels or comments: 15 MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 5/19/2025 Washington J Knudsen 23N 20W 20 4/91 Normal NV NV NV NV/NV NV/-- 5/92 Normal NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 6/03 WetNVNVNVNV/NVNV/NV 8/04 Dry NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 6/06 Normal NV NV NV NV/CS CS/NV 5/08 WetNVNVNVNV/NVNV/NV 6/09 Dry NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 5/10 Dry NV CS NV NV/NV NV/NV 4/12 Normal NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 9/13 Normal CS CS NV NV/CS NV/CS 10/14 Normal NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 8/15 WetNVNVNVNV/NVNV/NV 3/16 Normal NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 4/17 Dry NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 4/18 Normal NV NV NV WS/WS NV/NV 10/19 WetNVNVNVNV/NVNV/NV 6/20 Normal WS NV NV WS/WS WS/WS 8/21 Dry NV NV NV NV/NV NV/NV 6/22 WetNVNVNVNV/NVNV/NV 9/23 Dry NV CS NV NV/CS NV/NV 9999/99/8 2102/42/2 22 11 0 22/44 22/22 1 2 3 4/5 6/7 1 2 3 4/5 6/7 Exhibit 2 Field data sheet reference (if applicable): ___________ Wetland Determination from Aerial Imagery – Recording Form Project Name:Date:County: Investigator:Legal Description (T, R, S): Use the Decision Matrix below to complete Table 1. 1 The presence of hydric soils can be determined from the “Hydric Rating by Map Unit Feature” under “Land Classifications” from the Web Soil Survey. “Not Hydric” is the only category considered to not have hydric soils. Field sampling for the presence/absence of hydric soil indicators can be used in lieu of the hydric rating if appropriately documented by providing completed field data sheets. 2 At minimum, the most updated NWI data available for the area must be reviewed for this step. Any and all other local or regional wetland maps that are publically available should be reviewed. 3 Area should be reviewed in the field for the presence/absence of wetland hydrology indicators per the applicable 87 Manual Regional Supplement, including the D2 indicator (geomorphic position). Table 1. Area Hydric Soils Present Identified on NWI or other wetland map Percent with wet signatures from Exhibit 1 Other hydrology indicators present1 Wetland? 1 Answer “N/A” if field verification is not required and was not conducted. Hydric Soils present1 Identified on NWI or other wetland map2 Percent with wet signatures from Exhibit 1 Field verification required3 Wetland? Yes Yes >50%No Yes Yes Yes 30-50%No Yes Yes Yes <30%Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present Yes No >50%No Yes Yes No 30-50%Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present Yes No <30%No No No Yes >50%No Yes No Yes 30-50%No Yes No Yes <30%No No No No >50%Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present No No 30-50%Yes Yes, if other hydrology indicators present No No <30%No No 16 MN CSG 2019-69 LLC 5/19/2025 Washignton J Knudsen 23N 20W 20 1No No 22 No No 2No No 11 No No 3 No No 0 No No 4No No 22 No No 5No No 44 No No 6No No 22 No No 7No No 22 No No AREAM Appendix F: Field Photographs AREAM General upland Project landscape viewed to southwest form the northcentral portion of the Study Area General upland Project landscape viewed to the south from the northeastern portion of the Study Area AREAM Wetland 1, viewed to the east from the margin on the southern portion of the feature Channelized/drain-tiled portion of Wetland 1, near the embanked crossing AREAM Ponded portion of Wetland 1,viewed to the north along its western edge Area 3, viewed to the northeast from the northern edge of the Study Area AREAM Area 4, viewed to the east along the northern edge of the Study Area Area 5, viewed to the east from the western extent of the feature AREAM Area 6, viewed to the southwest from the center of the feature Area 7, viewed to the south from the southeastern corner of the Study Area AREAM Appendix G: Wetland Data Sheets Project/Site: Applicant/Owner:State: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X X X Yes X Remarks: No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):5 Wetland Hydrology Present? Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):8 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) SP in forested portion of wetland, near the SW boundary. Monocultures of RCG and cattail further in, but not at margin. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?Yes No significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: NWI Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Long:-92.86542256 Datum:LRR K 45.24652885 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Northcentral and Northeast Region See ERDC/EL TR-12-1; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 9/30/2027 Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Standing water within 10 feet MN CSG 2019-69 LLC City/County:Washington Sampling Date:5/16/2025 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope %:1 NEE MN Sampling Point:SP 1-1 J Knudsen Section, Township, Range:S20, T24, R20 NAD863Z15 543 - Markey muck ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.Column Totals:(B) 6. Herb Stratum (Plot size:X 1.X 2.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X 7. 7. 35 =Total Cover 15 ft ) Ostrya virginiana No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Some later season forbs were difficult to ID =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.60 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Woody Vine Stratum 30 ft )Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. No FACW data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Solidago gigantea 10 No FACW 30 =Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Phalaris arundinacea 25 Yes FACW 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Onoclea sensibilis 15 Yes FACW Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Osmundastrum cinnamomeum 10 FACU species 15 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.48 125 (A) FACU FAC species 30 90 0 0 Total % Cover of: 160 OBL species Multiply by: FACW species 80 60 310 UPL species 0 0 FACU 7 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:85.7% Acer negundo 20 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 10 Yes 10 Yes FAC 6 (A) Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10 Yes FACW Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.SP 1-1 Tree Stratum 30 ft ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Ulmus americana 10 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:Acer negundo Quercus rubra 5 No ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: X X X X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 145) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Yes No Remarks: Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Black Histic (A3) Mesic Spodic (A17) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Dark Surface (S7) MLRA 149B) Redox Depressions (F8)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Other (Explain in Remarks)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Iron Monosulfide (A18) Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 145) Depleted Matrix (F3)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Stratified Layers (A5)High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) 0-15 10YR 2/2 100 Histic Epipedon (A2) Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Muck greasy muck Loc2 Texture Remarks SOIL SP 1-1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner:State: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No X No X X No X X X X Yes X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Northcentral and Northeast Region See ERDC/EL TR-12-1; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 9/30/2027 Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Vegetation distinct MN CSG 2019-69 LLC City/County:Washington Sampling Date:5/16/2025 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Bench Local relief (concave, convex, none):None Slope %:2 NEE MN Sampling Point:SP 1-2 J Knudsen Section, Township, Range:S20, T24, R20 NAD863Z15 159B - Anoka loamy fine sand, 3-9 percent slopes None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Long:-92.86568567 Datum:LRR K 45.24665321 significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) SP in woodland adjacent to shoulder of slope, running into basin. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.Column Totals:(B) 6. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.SP 1-2 Tree Stratum 30 ft ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Acer negundo 20 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:Quercus rubra Prunus americana 5 No 20 Yes FACU 2 (A) Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 No FACW Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:UPL 6 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:33.3% Acer negundo 20 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 20 Yes FACU FAC species 65 195 0 0 Total % Cover of: 10 OBL species Multiply by: FACW species 5 268 573 UPL species 20 100 Rhamnus cathartica 5 No FAC FACU species 67 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.65 157 (A) 45 =Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Geranium maculatum 25 Yes FACU 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Trillium grandiflorum 15 Yes UPL Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophyllum virginianum 10 No FAC data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Toxicodendron radicans 10 No FAC Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Woody Vine Stratum 30 ft )Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height.Parthenocissus quinquefolia 2 No FACU Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.60 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Some later season forbs were difficult to ID 2 =Total Cover 7. 7. 50 =Total Cover 15 ft ) Ostrya virginiana ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: X SOIL SP 1-2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features Some small depletions (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 5-20 10YR 3/2 Loamy/Clayey lots of roots, some sand, some organics Loc2 Texture Remarks M Loamy/Clayey9510YR 4/1 5 D Histic Epipedon (A2) Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 145) Depleted Matrix (F3)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Stratified Layers (A5)High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) 0-5 10YR 2/2 100 Black Histic (A3) Mesic Spodic (A17) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Dark Surface (S7) MLRA 149B) Redox Depressions (F8)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Other (Explain in Remarks)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Iron Monosulfide (A18) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) No other redox seen - some organics mixed in Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 145) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Yes No Remarks: Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner:State: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X No X No X X No X X X X X X Yes X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Northcentral and Northeast Region See ERDC/EL TR-12-1; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 9/30/2027 Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Standing water within 10 feet MN CSG 2019-69 LLC City/County:Washington Sampling Date:5/16/2025 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope %:1 NEE MN Sampling Point:SP 1-1 J Knudsen Section, Township, Range:S20, T24, R20 NAD863Z15 543 - Markey muck NWI Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Long:-92.86551818 Datum:LRR K 45.2489384 significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) SP in forested portion of wetland, near the NW boundary and pond. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):10 Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):7 Wetland Hydrology Present? ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.Column Totals:(B) 6. Herb Stratum (Plot size:X 1.X 2.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.SP 1-1 Tree Stratum 30 ft ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Fraxinus pennsylvanica 15 Yes FACW Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:Acer negundo 15 Yes FAC 6 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:6 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100.0% Acer negundo 10 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 5 Yes FAC FAC species 35 105 0 0 Total % Cover of: 130 OBL species Multiply by: FACW species 65 0 235 UPL species 0 0 FACU species 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =2.35 100 (A) 15 =Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Phalaris arundinacea 20 Yes FACW 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Impatiens capensis 15 Yes FACW Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Osmundastrum cinnamomeum 10 No FACW data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Urtica dioica 5 No FAC Verbena hastata 5 No FACW Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Woody Vine Stratum 30 ft )Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.55 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Some later season forbs were difficult to ID =Total Cover 7. 7. 30 =Total Cover 15 ft ) Rhamnus cathartica ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: X X X X SOIL SP 1-1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Muck greasy muck Loc2 Texture Remarks Histic Epipedon (A2) Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 145) Depleted Matrix (F3)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Stratified Layers (A5)High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) 0-12 10YR 2/2 100 Black Histic (A3) Mesic Spodic (A17) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Dark Surface (S7) MLRA 149B) Redox Depressions (F8)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Other (Explain in Remarks)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Iron Monosulfide (A18) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 145) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Yes No Remarks: Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner:State: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No X No X X No X X X X Yes X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Northcentral and Northeast Region See ERDC/EL TR-12-1; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 9/30/2027 Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Vegetation distinct MN CSG 2019-69 LLC City/County:Washington Sampling Date:5/16/2025 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Bench Local relief (concave, convex, none):None Slope %:2 NEE MN Sampling Point:SP 2-2 J Knudsen Section, Township, Range:S20, T24, R20 NAD863Z15 159B - Anoka loamy fine sand, 3-9 percent slopes None Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Long:-92.86562651 Datum:LRR K 45.24882879 significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) SP in woodland adjacent to pond and wetland fringe. Antecedent precipitation conditions were normal. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.Column Totals:(B) 6. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4.X VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.SP 2-2 Tree Stratum 30 ft ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Acer negundo 20 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:Quercus rubra 20 Yes FACU 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:7 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:28.6% Acer negundo 20 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 10 Yes FACU FAC species 55 165 0 0 Total % Cover of: 0 OBL species Multiply by: FACW species 0 320 510 UPL species 5 25 Rhamnus cathartica 5 No FAC FACU species 80 Prevalence Index = B/A =3.64 140 (A) 35 =Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ft )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Geranium maculatum 25 Yes FACU 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Poa pratensis 20 Yes FACU Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Trillium grandiflorum 5 No UPL data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Toxicodendron radicans 5 No FAC Galium boreale 5 No FAC Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Woody Vine Stratum 30 ft )Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height.Parthenocissus quinquefolia 5 Yes FACU Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.60 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Some later season forbs were difficult to ID 5 =Total Cover 7. 7. 40 =Total Cover 15 ft ) Quercus rubra ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: X SOIL SP 2-2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features Some small depletions M (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 8-18 10YR 3/2 Loamy/Clayey lots of roots, some sand, some organics Loc2 Texture Remarks M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations Combination of organics and mineral - likley at delineation lline 10YR 4/6 3 C 95 10YR 4/1 2 D Histic Epipedon (A2) Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 145) Depleted Matrix (F3)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Stratified Layers (A5)High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) 0-8 10YR 2/2 100 Black Histic (A3) Mesic Spodic (A17) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Dark Surface (S7) MLRA 149B) Redox Depressions (F8)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Other (Explain in Remarks)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Iron Monosulfide (A18) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) No other redox seen - some organics mixed in Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 145) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Yes No Remarks: Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner:State: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation X , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No No X X No X X Yes X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Northcentral and Northeast Region See ERDC/EL TR-12-1; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 9/30/2027 Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Off-site imagery review keyed as upland. MN CSG 2019-69 LLC City/County:Washington Sampling Date:5/16/2025 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope %:1 NEE MN Sampling Point:3 J Knudsen Section, Township, Range:S20, T24, R20 NAD863Z15 155B - Chetek Sandy Loam, 1-6 percent slopes Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Long:-92.87035741 Datum:LRR K 45.24924636 significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) SP in closed depression that sometimes shows wetlandy hydroloogy signatures on aerial imagery. Antecedent precipitation was normal. Cropland is not normal circumstances. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.Column Totals:(B) 6. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.3 Tree Stratum ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:(B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: FAC species Total % Cover of: OBL species Multiply by: FACW species UPL species FACU species Prevalence Index = B/A = (A) =Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Woody Vine Stratum )Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.=Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Vegetation not evalauted or used as wetland criteria due to cropping =Total Cover 7. 7. =Total Cover ) ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: X SOIL 3 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features More sand - some gravel (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 6-20 10YR 4/4 Loamy/Clayey Some sand, blocky. Dry. Loc2 Texture Remarks Loamy/Clayey100 Histic Epipedon (A2) Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 145) Depleted Matrix (F3)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Stratified Layers (A5)High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) 0-6 10YR 2/2 100 Black Histic (A3) Mesic Spodic (A17) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Dark Surface (S7) MLRA 149B) Redox Depressions (F8)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Other (Explain in Remarks)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Iron Monosulfide (A18) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 145) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Yes No Remarks: Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner:State: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation X , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No No X X No X X Yes X Remarks: No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) SP in closed depression that sometimes shows wetlandy hydroloogy signatures on aerial imagery. Antecedent precipitation was normal. Cropland is not normal circumstances. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?Yes No significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Long:-92.86842702 Datum:LRR K 45.24883414 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Northcentral and Northeast Region See ERDC/EL TR-12-1; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 9/30/2027 Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Off-site imagery review keyed as upland. MN CSG 2019-69 LLC City/County:Washington Sampling Date:5/16/2025 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope %:1 NEE MN Sampling Point:4 J Knudsen Section, Township, Range:S20, T24, R20 NAD863Z15 159B - Anoka fine sand, 3-9 percent slopes ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.Column Totals:(B) 6. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 7. 7. =Total Cover ) No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Vegetation not evalauted or used as wetland criteria due to cropping =Total Cover Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.=Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Woody Vine Stratum )Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) =Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. FACU species Prevalence Index = B/A = (A) FAC species Total % Cover of: OBL species Multiply by: FACW species UPL species (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.4 Tree Stratum ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 145) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Yes No Remarks: Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Black Histic (A3) Mesic Spodic (A17) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Dark Surface (S7) MLRA 149B) Redox Depressions (F8)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Other (Explain in Remarks)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Iron Monosulfide (A18) Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 145) Depleted Matrix (F3)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Stratified Layers (A5)High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) 0-12 10YR 2/2 100 Histic Epipedon (A2) Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) 10YR 2/2 40 60 Loamy/Clayey Some sand, blocky. Dry. Loc2 Texture Remarks Sandy Loamy as above SOIL 4 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features Sandy and laomd mixed. Loam on top (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 12-20 10YR 4/3 ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Project/Site: Applicant/Owner:State: Investigator(s): Lat: Soil Map Unit Name:NWI classification: X Are Vegetation X , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. No No X X No X X Yes X U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Northcentral and Northeast Region See ERDC/EL TR-12-1; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 9/30/2027 Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) Off-site imagery review keyed as upland. MN CSG 2019-69 LLC City/County:Washington Sampling Date:5/16/2025 Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope %:2 NEE MN Sampling Point:SP 5 J Knudsen Section, Township, Range:S20, T24, R20 NAD863Z15 159B - Anoka fine sand, 3-9 percent slopes Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Long:-92.86643284 Datum:LRR K 45.24863799 significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes If yes, optional Wetland Site ID: Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) SP in closed depression that sometimes shows wetlandy hydroloogy signatures on aerial imagery. Antecedent precipitation was normal. Cropland is not normal circumstances. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Surface Water (A1) Water Marks (B1)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Sediment Deposits (B2)Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Drainage Patterns (B10) High Water Table (A2)Aquatic Fauna (B13)Moss Trim Lines (B16) Saturation (A3)Marl Deposits (B15)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Iron Deposits (B5)Thin Muck Surface (C7)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Microtopographic Relief (D4) Drift Deposits (B3)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)Geomorphic Position (D2) Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Remarks: No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present? ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.(A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 1 = 1.x 2 = 2.x 3 = 3.x 4 = 4.x 5 = 5.Column Totals:(B) 6. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1. 2.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. (Plot size: 1. 2. 3. 4. VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.SP 5 Tree Stratum ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:(B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Prevalence Index worksheet: FAC species Total % Cover of: OBL species Multiply by: FACW species UPL species FACU species Prevalence Index = B/A = (A) =Total Cover 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation )2 - Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Sapling/shrub – Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree – Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Woody Vine Stratum )Woody vines – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.=Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Vegetation not evalauted or used as wetland criteria due to cropping =Total Cover 7. 7. =Total Cover ) ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 Sampling Point: X SOIL SP 5 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features Lighter with less loam (inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 12-20 10YR 5/2 Sandy Sandy with some loam Loc2 Texture Remarks Sandy100 Histic Epipedon (A2) Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Red Parent Material (F21) (outside MLRA 145) Depleted Matrix (F3)Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Stratified Layers (A5)High Chroma Sands (S11) (LRR K, L)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) 0-12 10YR 4/1 100 Black Histic (A3) Mesic Spodic (A17) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Dark Surface (S7) MLRA 149B) Redox Depressions (F8)Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Other (Explain in Remarks)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Iron Monosulfide (A18) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Marl (F10) (LRR K, L) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 145) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Yes No Remarks: Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: ENG FORM 6116-8, SEP 2024 Northcentral and Northeast – Version 2.0 MNRAM 3.2 Wetland Assessment Data Form Page 1 5/16/2025 Special Features (from list, p.2--enter letter/s)-____-____-____-____ #1 Community Number (circle each community which represents at least 10% of the wetland) Community Type (wet meadow, marsh)-Wooded Swamp/3B ------ Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover Class Community Quality (E, H, M, L)0.1 0 0 0 Community Type (wet meadow, marsh)-Shallow marsh/13B ------ Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover Class Community Quality (E, H, M, L)0.1 0 0 0 Community Type (wet meadow, marsh)-------- Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover Class Community Quality (E, H, M, L)0 0 0 Community Type (wet meadow, marsh)-Seasonally Flooded basin/16B ------ Community Proportion (% of total) Dominant Vegetation / Cover Class Invasive/exotic Vegetation / Cover Class Community Quality (E, H, M, L)-0 0 0 Circular 39 Types (primary <TAB> others) Cowardin Types Photo ID 0.1 Low 0 -0 -0 - 0.10 Low ------ 0.08 Low 0.00 -0.00 -0.00 - #4 Listed, rare, special plant species?n Y N Y N Y N Y N #5 Rare community or habitat?n Y N Y N Y N Y N #6 Pre-European-settlement conditions?n Y N Y N Y N Y N Phalaris arundinacea/3 2 Rhamnus cathartica/2 Impatens capensis/2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica/2 Acer negundo/2 3 Phalaris arundinacea/2 Typha angustifolia/2 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B #2 & #3 ~ Describe each community type individually below ~~ Describe each community type individually below ~ Pl a n t C o m m u n i t y # 1 20% Phalaris arundinacea/4 Onoclea sensibilis/3 Acer negundo/3 Ostrya virginiana/2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica/2 Ulmus americana/2 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 10A, 13A, 13B, 12B, 14A, 15A, 15B, 16A, 16B 20% 60% Quercus rubra/2 4 Average vegetative diversity/integrity: Weighted Average veg. diversity/integrity: Pl a n t C o m m u n i t y # 2 Pl a n t C o m m u n i t y # 3 Pl a n t C o m m u n i t y # 4 * Highest rated community veg. div./integ: Cover Class Class Range 1 0 -3% 2 3 -10% 3 10 -25% 4 25 -50% 5 50 -75% 6 75 -100% Floodplain Forest [1A, 2A, 3A] * Hardwood Swamp [3B] * Coniferous Bog [2A, 4B] * Coniferous Swamp [4B] * Open Bog [1B, 5A,5B, 6A, 7A, 9A, 10A] * Calcareous Fen [7B, 11B, 14A] * Shrub Swamp [6B] * Alder Thicket [8A] * Shrub-carr [8B] * Sedge Meadow [10B, 11A, 12A, 13A] * Shallow Marsh [13B] * Deep Marsh [12B] * Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie [14B, 15A] * Fresh (Wet) Meadow [15B] * Shallow, Open Water [9B, 16A] * Seasonally Flooded Basin [16B] Wetland name / ID ____Wetland 1_________ Wetland name / ID ___________________ Wetland name / ID __________________ Wetland name / ID __________________ WETLAND 1_Barr1_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version.xlsVegetative Diversity Integrity 6/2/2025 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 3637 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 7071 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 9091 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF MnRAM 3.2 Digital Worksheet, Side 2 Question Description Rating Highest-rated: 1 Veg. Table 2, Option 4 0.08 0.1 TOTAL VEG Rating 0.08 L 4 Listed, rare, special plant species?n next 5 Rare community or habitat?n next 6 Pre-European-settlement conditions?n next 7 hydrogeo & topo #N/A I Depressional/Isolated 8 Water depth (inches)FT Depress'l/Flow-through Water depth (% inundation)Trib Depress'l/Tributary 9 Local watershed/immedita drainage (acres)R Riverine 10 Existing wetland size 14.17 Lac Lacustrine 11 SOILS: Up/Wetland (survey classification + site) Peat Peatland 12 Outlet characteristics for flood retention B 0.5 Flood Floodplain 13 Outlet characteristics for hydrologic regime B 0.5 S Slope 14 Dominant upland land use (within 500 ft)B 0.5 0.5 O Other 15 Soil condition (wetland)A 1 16 Vegetation (% cover)25%M 0.5 17 Emerg. veg. flood resistance B 0.5 18 Sediment delivery B 0.5 19 Upland soils (based on soil group)B 0.5 20 Stormwater runoff pretreatment & detention C 0.1 1 21 Subwatershed wetland density A 1 22 Channels/sheet flow B 0.5 23 Adjacent naturalized buffer average width (feet)200 H WQ 1 M 0.5 24 Adjacent Area Management: % Full 100%1 1 1 adjacent area mgmt: % Manicured 0%0 adjacent area mgmt: % Bare 0%0 25 Adjacent Area Diversity & Structure: % Native 60%0.6 3 0.72 adjacent area diversity: % Mixed 20%0.1 adjacent area diversity: % Sparse/Inv./Exotic 20%0.02 26 Adjacent Area Slope: % Gentle 30%0.3 3 0.61 adjacent area slope: % Moderate 60%0.3 adjacent area slope: % Steep 10%0.01 Habitat n/a formulator 27 Downstream sensitivity/WQ protection B 0.5 E49 0.00 "=IF(E49="n/a",1,0)" 28 Nutrient loading A 1 E50 0.00 "=IF(E50="n/a",1.5,0)" 29 Shoreline wetland?N N E51 0.00 "=IF(E51="n/a",2,0)" 30 Rooted shoreline vegetation (%cover )50%0.5 Add 0.00 31 Wetland in-water width (in feet, average)8 0.1 32 Emergent vegetation erosion resistance B 0.5 33 Shoreline erosion potential C 0.1 1 34 Bank protection/upslope veg.B 0.5 35 Rare Wildlife N N 36 Scarce/Rare/S1/S2 local community N N CC Rtg Ltr 37 Vegetation interspersion cover (see diagram 1)6 M 0.5 1 0.1 L 38 Community interspersion (see diagram 2)2 M 0.5 0 2 0.1 L 39 Wetland detritus B 0.5 3 0.5 M 40 Wetland interspersion on landscape B 0.5 0.5 4 0.5 M 41 Wildlife barriers A 1 5 1 H 42 Amphibian breeding potential-hydroperiod A 1 6 0.5 M 43 Amphibian breeding potential--fish presence B 0.5 7 1 H 44 Amphibian & reptile overwintering habitat A 1 8 0.1 L 45 Wildlife species (list)Chorus frog, american toad, warblers, mallards N/A N/A N/A 46 Fish habitat quality C 0.1 -"Pick an example from the image" 47 Fish species (list) 48 Unique/rare educ./cultural/rec.opportunity N N 49 Wetland visibility C 0.1 50 Proximity to population N 0.1 1 L 0.1 51 Public ownership C 0.1 2 M 0.5 52 Public access C 0.1 3 H 1 53 Human influence on wetland A 1 4 H 1 54 Human influence on viewshed B 0.5 N/A N/A N/A 55 Spatial buffer B 0.5 -"Pick an example from the image" 56 Recreational activity potential C 0.1 57 Commercial crop--hydrologic impact B 0.5 Vegetative formula 58 GW - Wetland soils R R or D 0.1 "=C4", the Weighted Average Option 4 from Veg. Worksheet 59 GW - Subwatershed land use D R or D 1 60 GW - Wetland size and soil group D R or D 1 Characteristic Hydrology formula 61 GW - Wetland hydroperiod D R or D 1 "=(E17+E18+E19+F24)/4" F24 is the reverse rating 62 GW - Inlet/Outlet configuration D R or D 1 63 GW - Surrounding upland topographic relief D R or D 1 Flood Attenuation Formula breakout (not linked to D72) (E16 is reverse rated) 64 Restoration potential w/o flooding N Y or N 5.1 n/a formula is: 65 Landowners affected by restoration E a b c Enter valid choice none 0.56 ((E16+(F18+E23)/2+(E19+E22)/2+(E24+E25)/2+(F20+E21+E26)/3)/5) 66A Existing wetland size (acres) [from #10]14.17 __ acres flood outlet 0.575 ((F18+E23)/2+(E19+E22)/2+(E24+E25)/2+(F20+E21+E26)/3)/4 66B Total wetland restoration size (acres)__ acres 0.1 F-T 0.56 ((E16+(F18+E23)/2+(E19+E22)/2+(E24+E25)/2+ E26)/5) 66C (Calculated) Potential New Wetland Area [B-A]-14.17 __ acres ####both 0.575 ((F18+E23)/2+(E19+E22)/2+(E24+E25)/2+ E26)/4 67 Average width of naturalized upland buffer (potent 0 __ feet 0.1 value:#### 68 Likelihood of restoration success a b c Enter valid choice 69 Hydrologic alteration type Outlet, Tile, Ditch, GW pump, Wtrshd div., Filling 70 Potential wetland type (Circ. 39)1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 71 Wetland sensitivity to stormwater A E a b c 72 Additional stormwater treatment needs B a b c Water Quality--Wetland "=(D6*2+E18+F24+(G27+G28+G34)/3+E22+E40)/7" Function Name Formula shown to the right.Shoreline Protection Vegetative Diversity/Integrity 0.08 L "=IF(E41="y",((E42+E43+E44+E45+E46)/5),"N/A")" Hydrology - Characteristic 0.75 High N/A H38 =Habitat formula breakout/lookup (E22 is RR) Special Features Bump is below. none 0 0.54 (D6*2+E51+F49+F50+E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/10 Flood Attenuation 0.56 Med 49 1 0.544444 (D6*2+E51+ F50+E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/9 50 1.5 0.544444 (D6*2+E51+F49+ E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/9 Water Quality--Downstream 0.50 Med 51 2 0.544444 (D6*2+ F49+F50+E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/9 49&50 2.5 0.55 (D6*2+E51+ E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/8 Water Quality--Wetland 0.58 Med 49&51 3 0.55 (D6*2+ F50+E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/8 50&51 3.5 0.55 (D6*2+ F49+ E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/8 Shoreline Protection N/A N/A 49&50&51 4.5 0.557143 (D6*2+ E52+E53+(I27+G28+G31)/3+E17+F24)/7 Characteristic Wildlife Habitat Structure 0.54 0.54 Med Characteristic Fish Habitat formula Maintenance of Characteristic Fish Habitat 0.62 0.62 Med Maintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat 0.38 Med Characteristic Amphibian Habitat formula (see Lookup breakout below) E112=VLOOKUP(E54,T116:U117,2,FALSE) Aesthetics/Recreation/Education/Cultural 0.31 0.31 Low Amphibian Habitat Formula Breakout Commercial use 0.50 Med 0.5 0 0.00 Amphibian breeding is controlling factor 1 0.38 "=((E55)*(E56+(I27*2)+E53+E18+F24)/6)" Special Features listing:-____ Aesthetics/Rec/Ed/Cultural formula Groundwater Interaction discharge Groundwater Functional Index no special indicators Restoration Potential (draft formula)N/A N/A "=E69" Commercial use reflects just the rating for the question. Stormwater Sensitivity (not active) Special Features Bump-up reference table a Fish Habitat=E b Veg=E c Aesthetics=E Fi n a l Ra t i n g Ra t i n g Ca t e g o r y "IF(E65=".1",(E62+E63+E64+2*E65+E66+E67+E68)/8,(E61+E6 2+E63+E64+E65+E66+E67+E68)/8)" Fu n c t i o n a l R a t i n g S u m m a r i e s "=IF(D41="Y",((E58*2+G28+E22+F24+E40+E43+E42+F45)/9),( (E58*2+G28+E22+F24+E40)/6))" Ra w sc o r e Ad d i t i o n a l q u e s t i o n s Di g i t a l w o r k s h e e t , s e c t i o n I I Di g i t a l w o r k s h e e t , s e c t i o n I These are supplemental Lookup Tables and Intermediary formulas: User entry Community Interspersion LookUp Open Water Interspersion LookUp Hydrogeology and Topography LookUp % effectively drained: This comes in from Side 1 automatically using the weighted average. To use the highest rated veg. Community rating, please manually overwrite that value (shown to the right) into the field at E5. Enter data starting here. Yellow boxes are used in calculations. Scroll down to answer more questions and see formula calculations Th e s e a r e t h e f o r m u l a s f o r t h e f i n a l f u n c t i o n a l r a t i n g s s h o w n a t t h e l e f t . WETLAND 1_Barr1_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version.xls 2 6/2/2025 MnRAM_3.2_Score_Sheet.xls 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF d n AND #5=Y, then Wildlife=E g Wildlife/Fish=E h Aesthetics=E I Veg=E j N AND #35 =Y, Wildlife=E q ischargGW=recharge, GW=E r ischargY and GW=recharge, GW=E u Aesthetics=E Recharge/Discharge Tendency R 0.1 D 1 -Enter "R" or "D" WETLAND 1_Barr1_Function_MnRAM_Excel_Spreadsheet_Version.xls 3 6/2/2025 11 8 2 ' 92 3 ' 10 0 6 ' 75 2 ' 74 8 ' +/- 140 BLUE SPRUCE 2 ROWS OF TREES TO BE REMOVED +/- 120 BLUE SPRUCE 2 ROWS OF TREES TO BE REMOVED +/- 70 BLUE SPRUCE 2 ROWS OF TREES TO BE REMOVED +/- 160 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE 3 ROWS OF TREES TO REMIAN 1 PINE TREE +/- 150 MIX EVERGREEN & MIX DECIDUOUS TO REMAIN 11 MIX EVERGREEN TO REMAIN oAK / eLM / mAPLE / aSH ASPEN / COTTONWOOD 10 ACRES OF TREE TO REMAIN +/-750 TREES PER ACRE (7500 TREES) TO REMAIN oAK / eLM / mAPLE / aSH ASPEN / COTTONWOOD 4.5 ACRES OF TREE TO REMAIN +/-750 TREES PER ACRE (3300 TREES) TO REMAIN +/- 130 BLUE SPRUCE 2 ROWS OF TREES TO BE REMOVED +/- 130 BLUE SPRUCE TO BE REMOVED AREA #2 22,500 SF AREA #3 30,300 SF AREA #4 28,000 SF AREA #5 35,200 SF AREA #1 48,000 SF AREA #7 52,000 SF AREA #8 6,000 SF AREA #6 600,000 SF MINNESOTA FOREST GENERAL RANGES MINNESOTA GENERAL RANGES ·CONIFERS: OFTEN PLANTED AT A DENSITY OF 600-800 TREES PER ACRE. ·HARDWOODS: TYPICALLY PLANTED AT A DENSITY OF 400-500 TREES PER ACRE. ·MIXED FORESTS: BASED ON PLANTING RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU COULD SEE NUMBERS RANGING FROM 544 TREES PER ACRE FOR DECIDUOUS TREES PLANTED FOR FIBER PRODUCTION TO 1,815 TREES PER ACRE FOR SHRUBS AND SMALL STATURE TREES PLANTED FOR WINDBREAKS. 7087 20th Ave S, Centerville MN Phone: (651) 415-1000 www.DreamScapesMN.com c:\users\jimka\alexs lawn and turf\dreamscapes - documents\design projects 2025\jim\commercial\new energy equity\scandia\02-drawings\cad\11522 mayberry trail.dwgSave Date:09/05/25 Revisions: Drawing is 22" X 34" Paper 1.Print Name: Signature: Date:License #: Drawn: Designed: Date: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 9/05/2025 JAK 9/05/2025 James A. Kalkes, RLA 45071 JAK - 11522 MAYBERRY TRAIL - 11584 MAYBERRY TRAIL NORTH MARINE ON SAINT CROIX, MINNESOTA 55047 ·OVERSTORY / EVERGREEN TREES ··TOTAL ESTIMATED TREES ON-SITE =11,700 TREES ··TOTAL ESTIMATED TREES REMOVED =460 TREES ···Primarily 40' BLUE SPRUCE WIND ROW (NON-NATIVE) = 4% OF TOTAL TREES REMOVED =11,200 TREES TO REMAIN CITY of SCANDIA TREE PRESERVATION TREE PRESERVATION PLAN TP1 CITY of SCANDIA TREE PRESERVATION ·THE DEVELOPER, REPRESENTED BY JESSE DIMOND MET WITH THE CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 15TH TO DISCUSS THE TREE PRESERVATION PLAN REQUIREMENTS. DURING THAT MEETING IT WAS DISCUSSED AND AGREED TO BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT ANY NON-NATIVE TREES WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE REPLACED. THE MAIN TREES IN QUESTION WERE THE BLACK HILL SPRUCE, WHICH THEY DID WANT COUNTED AND REPLACED. ·DURING OUR SITE WALK WE DETERMINED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE TREES THAT WERE TO BE REMOVED WERE BLUE COLORADO SPRUCE, WHICH ARE NOT NATIVE. WE DETERMINED THAT LESS THAN 5% OF THE TREES WERE NATIVE, BLACK HILL SPRUCE. TREE AREAS IN PLAN ·AREA #1 48,000SF / 1.10 AC 25' TALL BLACK HILLS SPRUCE WIND ROW TO REMAIN ·AREA #2 22,500SF / 0.51 AC 25' BLUE SPRUCE WIND ROW TO BE REMOVED ·AREA #3 33,300SF / 0.76 AC 25' BLUE SPRUCE WIND ROW TO BE REMOVED ·AREA #4 28,000SF / 0.64 AC 25' BLUE SPRUCE WIND ROW TO BE REMOVED ·AREA #5 35,200SF / 0.80 AC 25' BLUE SPRUCE WIND ROW TO BE REMOVED ·AREA #6 600,000SF/13.7 AC 40YR OLD WOODS ASH, COTTONWOOD, POPLAR,ELM, MAPLE, OAK TO REMAIN ·AREA #7 52,000SF / 1.2 AC EVERGREENS PLANTED FOR HOUSE WIND BREAK TO REMAIN ·AREA #8 6,000 / 0.13 AC EVERGREENS ALONG ROAD FOR SCREENING TO REMAIN ***FOR EVERY 125 SF OF WOODLAND REMOVED, OWNER SHALL REPLACE 2X 2.5ca DECIDUOUS OR 2X 6' TALL CONIFEROUS ALL TREES (119,000SF / 2.73 AC) BEING REMOVED ARE BLUE SPRUCE(NON-NATIVE) WIND ROW PLANTINGS.