Loading...
4.a Variance from wetland setback for the construction of a driveay - Olinda Trail (Krause) Memorandum To: Scandia Planning Commission Reference: Krause Variance Request Copies To: Neil Soltis, City Administrator Brenda Eklund, City Clerk Project No.: 16322.017 Brent and Jane Krause, applicants From: Sherri Buss, RLA AICP, Planner Routing: Date: August 28, 2017 SUBJECT: Krause Request for Variance from the Required Wetland Setback for Proposed Driveway Location MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017 LOCATION: 19590 Olinda Trail North APPLICANTS: Brent and Jane Krause 17590 Henna Avenue North Hugo, MN 55038 ZONING: General Rural (GR) District and Shoreland District of Long Lake 60-DAY PERIOD: October 9, 2017 ITEMS REVIEWED: Application and Plan received August 10, 2017 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST: The applicants are requesting a variance to construct a driveway within a required wetland setback. The property is 19.47 acres in size and is located in the General Rural (GR) District and the Shoreland District of Long Lake, a Natural Environment Lake. Krause Variance Request Scandia Planning Commission Page 2 September 5, 2017 DETAILED EVALUATION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST: The applicants are proposing to develop a home, accessory structures and driveway on a vacant parcel located at 19590 Olinda Trail North. The parcel includes several wetlands that are located between the home and Olinda Trail North. The City’s Development Code requires a 75’ setback from the boundaries of unclassified water bodies (wetlands that are not classified as Public Waters by the DNR). The applicants have proposed a location that would maintain the required setback from all but one of the wetlands on the site, and the proposed location would be 45’ from that wetland. The results of the wetland delineation indicate that applicants are requesting the variance from the wetland with the lowest quality among those on the parcel. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan states that the General Rural (GR) District is a residential area of mixed lot sizes. The intent of the district is to establish a rural residential area that meets the Metropolitan Council requirement for rural communities that overall densities shall not exceed 1 housing unit per 10 acres. Residential accessory structures, including driveways, are a permitted use in the GR District, and a driveway access is required for a residential use. The Comprehensive Plan also includes goals to protect wetlands, mature woodlands, and other natural resources. The proposed variance is requested to permit the location of driveway where the required wetland setbacks will be maintained from most of the wetlands on the property, with a proposed 45’ setback (rather than the required 75’) from one wetland that is the lowest quality wetland on the site, based on the assessment included with the wetland delineation. The proposed location also protects a high quality woodland. The proposed use and variance request for the driveway location is generally consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Lot Size and Setbacks The applicants’ lot is approximately 19.5acres in size, and exceeds the minimum 2.0-acre lot size permitted in the GR District. The required structure setbacks from property lines in the GR District include the following:  Front: 40 feet  Side: 20 feet  Rear: 50 feet  Unclassified water bodies: 75 feet The proposed locations of the home, accessory building, and septic field meet the setback requirements. The driveway requires a variance from the required setback from unclassified water bodies. Krause Variance Request Scandia Planning Commission Page 3 September 5, 2017 Accessory Structures There are no existing residential accessory structures on the parcel. The Development Code permits up to 2 residential accessory structures with a total area of 3,500 square feet on the parcel and an unlimited number of agricultural structures. The applicants have proposed one accessory building with an area of 2400 square feet. The number and size of accessory buildings proposed meets the ordinance requirement. Lot Coverage The GR District allows up to 25% lot coverage by impervious surfaces. The Planner calculated the lot coverage to be approximately 10% of the parcel. The lot coverage meets the Code requirement. Structure Height The designs for the proposed structures were not included in the application. The Development Code permits a maximum structure height of 35’ in the GR District. The Planner has included a condition for the variance that the structures developed on the property shall comply with the height standard in the Development Code. Wastewater Treatment The plans show the proposed location of the septic drainfield. The proposed drainfield meets the setback requirements from structures, wetlands, and the proposed well. The Planner has included a condition that the applicants shall apply for and obtain County approval of the proposed septic system. Stormwater Management and Wetlands The Washington Conservation District (WCD) reviewed the wetland delineation and proposed driveway location. Jay Riggs, WCD Administrator, provided the following comment: “From a setback perspective, the new driveway location reduces tree impacts, reduces grading, reduces impervious area, and places the driveway further away from the eastern higher quality wetland. It does put it closer to the drainage way wetland, but this is a lower quality wetland that will likely not be adversely impacted by the driveway.” Jay’s comments noted that there is a location for a 10’ driveway that could achieve all required setbacks and would not require a variance, but he did not recommend this location due to the resulting impacts to high quality woods on the parcel. The Planner sent the application to the Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District for review. Jim Shaver, the District Administrator, provided the following comment: “The District supports this request in that if favors the higher quality wetlands on the site and there is not a reasonable alternative for the driveway. It will not require a District permit as it is a lot over 10 acres with the house pad well over 1,000 feet from a District water resource.” Krause Variance Request Scandia Planning Commission Page 4 September 5, 2017 Driveway/Access The proposed driveway access is from Olinda Trail North, a County roadway. The County approved an access permit for the driveway, with conditions regarding the construction of the driveway. Scandia’s Fire Chief reviewed the access, and requested that the following conditions be included for approval of the variance:  The driveway should be 12 feet wide.  The location where the driveway connects with Olinda Trail should be as close to a right angle as possible for proper sight lines. DETAILED DISCUSSION OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST Chapter 1, Section 6.0 of the Development Code includes the criteria and required process for considering variance requests. Variances may only be granted when the terms of the variance are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the development code. The variance criteria include: 1. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the Development Code. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. 5. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 6. The required variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. 7. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Applicants’ Rationale for the Variance The applicants identified the following practical difficulties that require a variance in order to construct a viable accessory solar system on their property:  The property includes several wetlands.  The proposed location protects the higher-value wetlands and is unlikely to have negative impacts on the lower-quality wetland on the property.  The proposed location protects more mature trees than other potential driveway locations. Findings The following bullets present the Planner’s findings related to the Krause request for a variance, based on the statutory criteria for granting a variance. Each of the criteria are shown in italics:  Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control. Krause Variance Request Scandia Planning Commission Page 5 September 5, 2017 Granting the requested variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code based on the following: o The proposed residential use is permitted in the General Rural District, and a driveway is required to support that use. o The proposed location will meet goals and policies in the Comprehensive plan because it will protect the higher quality wetlands on the site, is not likely to have negative impacts on the wetland where the setback will be reduced, will minimize impacts to mature trees and grading, and will minimize impervious cover in comparison to other potential driveway locations.  The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner under the conditions allowed by official control(s). Single-family residences and driveways are reasonable uses in the GR District. The proposed use could not be developed without a driveway.  The practical difficulties are not caused by the landowner, and are unique to the property. The practical difficulties are caused by the locations of several wetlands and a higher quality woodland on the property within the parcel. It is not possible to develop a driveway on the site that would avoid impacts to all of these features.  The variance would not alter the essential character of the area. Granting the variance would not alter the essential character of the area. The applicants’ property is surrounded by parcels with single-family residences and vacant parcels.  Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. The practical difficulties are caused by the locations of the existing wetlands and woodland on the parcel, and are not related to economic conditions.  The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed variance will not impair the supply of light or air to adjacent properties. The addition of the driveway meeting the County’s conditions for the access permit will not increase congestion or endanger public safety. The proposed driveway location will not impair property values in the neighborhood.  The required variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty. Krause Variance Request Scandia Planning Commission Page 6 September 5, 2017 Construction of the proposed driveway within the setback of the lowest quality wetland on the parcel and maintaining a setback of 45’ from that wetland to minimize potential impacts to the wetland is the minimum action required to eliminate the practical difficulty.  Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Granting the variance will provide adequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission can recommend the following: 1. Approval 2. Approval with conditions 3. Denial with findings 4. Table the request PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planner recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance to permit construction of the proposed driveway that is a minimum of 45’ from the boundary of the wetland identified as Basin 3 on the parcel located at 19590 Olinda Trail North, with the following conditions: 1. The applicants shall construct the driveway in the location consistent with the plans submitted to the City on August 10, 2017 and the conditions of the County access permit. 2. The driveway shall be a minimum width of 12 feet. 3. The location where the driveway connects with Olinda Trail shall be as close to a right angle as possible for proper sight lines. 4. The applicants shall obtain a building permit for construction of the home and accessory building. The buildings constructed on the parcel shall comply with the Development Code. 5. The applicants shall obtain a County permit for the proposed septic system on the property. 6. The Applicant shall pay all fees and escrows related to this application. Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW’s-Soil ID-Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environmental Referrals Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking-Tree Surveys-Natural Resource Management Plans 1 August 3, 2017 RE: Project Name: Krause – Olinda Trail Driveway Delineation Report Project Location: Scandia – Washington County PID# 27.032.20.13.0003 T32N, R20W, Section 27 Project Description: Wetland Delineation Report Jacobson Environmental, PLLC. (JE) visited the above referenced site on June 22, 2017 to perform an official wetland delineation in accordance with the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2012 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation: Northcentral and Northeast Region. The site was revisited on August 2, 2017 to delineate a drainage way that was found by the July 27 TEP. The investigated area included the southern portion of the above-mentioned parcel located north of 19540 Olinda Trail in Scandia, Minnesota. See Figure 1 for a Site Location Map. The DNR National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) identified two wetlands on the investigated portion of the parcel. The Web Soil Survey identified the soils Santiago silt loam (rating=0), Ronneby fine sand (rating=5), and Duluth silt loam (rating=3) in the investigated region. The DNR Public Waters Inventory identified no PWI wetlands or public waterways within the investigated boundaries. Three basins were delineated on the southern portion of the parcel, which are summarized below. Basin ID Wetland Type Dominant Vegetation Circular 39 Cowardin Eggers & Reed 1 Type 2/3 PEM1B/C Shallow marsh w/wet meadow fringe Reed canary grass and narrowleaf cattail 2 Type 2/3 PEM1B/C Shallow marsh w/wet meadow fringe Reed canary grass and narrowleaf cattail 3 Type 1 PEM1A Seasonally flooded basin White grass The growing season in this area is approximately from mid-April to mid-October, when the air temperature averages above 28 degrees F. This delineation was completed during the growing season. The previous three month’s precipitation data suggests that the delineation and sampling were conducted during wetter than normal conditions, though it is unlikely this affected delineated boundaries. Antecedent precipitation data is located in Appendix A. All figures and appendices referenced by this report are presented at the end of the text. The purpose of this study was to investigate the project area, identify areas meeting the technical criteria for wetlands, delineate the jurisdictional extent of the wetland basins, and classify the wetland habitat. This wetland delineation was performed and reported by Wayne Jacobson, Minnesota Professional Soil Scientist #30611, Society of Wetland Scientists – Professional Wetland Scientist #1000, University of Minnesota / BWSR Wetland Delineator, Certified #1019, American Fisheries Society – Associate Fisheries Scientist #A-171. Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW’s-Soil ID-Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environmental Referrals Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking-Tree Surveys-Natural Resource Management Plans 2 Methodology The wetlands on the subject property were delineated using the routine determination methodology set forth in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetland boundaries were determined through a routine analysis of the vegetation, soils and hydrology which must all show wetland characteristics in order for an area to be delineated as a wetland. Wetlands are areas that are saturated or inundated with surface and or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in hydric soil conditions. Examples of wetlands include seasonally flooded basins, floodplain forests, wet meadows, shallow and deep marshes, shrub swamps, wooded swamps, fens, and bogs. Vegetation The plant species within the parcel were catalogued and assigned a wetland indicator status according to : Lichvar, R.W., Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner, 2014. The National Wetland Plant List: 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings, Phytoneuron 2014-41: 1-42. In the text of this report and on the enclosed data forms, the plant indicator status follows the plant’s scientific name unless a status has not been assigned. The hydrophytic plant criterion is met when more than 50 percent of the dominant species by the 50/20 rule for each stratum (herb, shrub/sapling, tree, and woody vine) were assigned an obligate (OBL)1, facultative wet (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC) wetland status. With the 50/20 rule, dominants are generally measured by absolute % cover in each stratum which individually or collectively account for more than 50% of total vegetative cover in the stratum, plus any other species which itself accounts for at least 20% of the total vegetative cover. Soils A hydric soil is a soil formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. If a soil exhibits the indicators of a hydric soil or is identified as a hydric soil the hydric soil criterion is met. The break between hydric and non-hydric soils was determined by excavating soil pits along transects crossing the wetland/upland eco-tone and evaluating the soil colors, textures, and presence or absence of redoximorphic indicators (i.e., mottles, gley or oxidized rhizospheres). Hydric Soil Indicators for the Midwest Region were noted as presented in the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States version 7.0 (USDA NRCS 2010) if present at each sample point. Also, upper soil profiles were compared to the mapped or inclusionary soil series found in the sample area for soil identification purposes. 1 OBL=Obligate Wetland, occurs an estimated 99% in wetlands. FACW=Facultative Wetland, has an estimated 67%-99% probability of occurrence in wetlands. FAC=Facultative, is equally likely to occur in wetlands and non - wetlands, 34%-66% probability. FACU=Facultative Upland, occurs in wetlands only occasionally, 1%-23% probability. UPL=Upland, almost never occurs in wetlands, <1% probability. NI= No Indicator, insufficient information available to determine an indicator status. Positive or negative sign previo usly indicated a frequency toward higher (+) or lower (-) frequency of occurrence with an category. Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW’s-Soil ID-Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environmental Referrals Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking-Tree Surveys-Natural Resource Management Plans 3 Cautions used in applying the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils There are hydric soils with morphologies that are difficult to interpret. These include soils with black, gray, or red parent material; soils with high pH; soils high or low in content of organic matter; recently developed hydric soils, and soils high in iron inputs. In some cases we do not currently have indicators to assist in the identification of hydric soils in these situations. As long as the soil meets the definition of a hydric soil, the lack of an indicator does not preclude the soil from being hydric. The indicators were developed mostly to identify the boundary of hydric soil areas and generally work best on the margins. Not all of the obviously wetter hydric soils will be identified by the indicators. Redoximorphic features are most likely to occur in soils that cycle between anaerobic (reduced) and aerobic (oxidized) conditions. Morphological features of hydric soils indicate that saturation and an aerobic conditions have existed under either contemporary or former hydrologic regimes. Where soil morphology seems inconsistent with the landscape, vegetation, or observable hydrology, it may be necessary to obtain the assistance of an experienced soil or wetland scientist to determine whether the soil is hydric. To clarify on some Washington County sites, 1. Many of these soils have black or gray parent materials 2. Many of the soils have a high organic matter content 3. The hydric soil margin is typically higher than the wetland boundary margin on the site 4. Not all of the obviously wetter soils will be identified by the indicators 5. Many of the hydric soils are Mollisols which are classic problem hydric soils in many cases Wetland Classification Wetland classifications discussed in the text are set forth in Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (FWS/OBS Publication 79/31, Cowardin et al. 1979) and Wetlands of the United States (USFWS Circular 39, Shaw and Fredine, 1971.) Additionally, plant community types as named by Eggers and Reed (1998) are given. Topographic maps, National Wetlands Inventory maps, the Web Soil Survey, Aerial Photographs, and DNR Protected Waters maps were consulted to locate potential wetland habitats. The Routine On-site Determination Method was used on this site. In this method, the following procedures were used: 1) The vegetative community was sampled in all present strata to determine whether 50% of the dominant plant species were hydrophytic using the 50/20 method. 2) Soil pits were dug using a dutch auger to depths of 18”-40”, noting soil profiles and any hydric soil characteristics. 3) Signs of wetland hydrology were noted and were compared to field criteria such as depth to shallow water table and depth of soil saturation found in the soil pits. Wetland edges were marked with orange numbered pin flags. 4-foot wood lath marked with orange “wetland boundary” flagging tape or flagging tied on vegetation may be use d if site conditions warrant. Any wetlands were mapped using modern survey methods by others. At least one sample point transect crosses each delineated wetland edge. These transects consist of an upland sample point, and a wetland sample point. Other sample points may be located in areas which have one or more of the Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW’s-Soil ID-Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environmental Referrals Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking-Tree Surveys-Natural Resource Management Plans 4 wetland vegetation, soils, or hydrologic characteristics present, or where questionable conditions exist. Sample points are marked with orange pin flags with a pink ribbon tied on them. Sample data sheets are found in Appendix B. Basin 1 Basin 1 was a PEM1B/C Type 2/3 shallow marsh with a wet meadow fringe. The wet meadow was dominated by reed canary grass and the shallow marsh was dominated by narrowleaf cattails. The basin continued to the northeast of the investigated region of the parcel. A ditch r an from the west end of the basin and connected to the north end of Basin 2. The basin edges were typically saturated at or near the surface at the time of the field visit. Adjacent upland was typically sparsely vegetated with a canopy of red oaks, quaking aspen, and green ash. Primary and secondary indicators were not observed in the upland, and hydric soil indicators were not found in upland soils. The wetland boundary typically followed a gradual change in vegetation from wetland to upland plant communities, as well as a more distinct change in topography. Basin 1 was identified by the DNR NWI as a PEM1C. It was located within an area mapped Duluth silt loam by the Web Soil Survey. Sample data sheets 1-UP and 1-WET correspond to this basin. Basin 2 Basin 2 was a PEM1B/C Type 2/3 shallow marsh with a wet meadow fringe. The wet meadow was dominated by reed canary grass and a few sedge species and the shallow marsh was generally dominated by narrowleaf cattail. The basin continued to the south off of the property. The basin edges were typically saturated at or near the surface at the time of the field visit. Adjacent upland was typically sparsely vegetated with some common buckthorn and black cherry shrubs and a canopy of oak and green ash. Primary and secondary indicators were not observed in the upland, and hydric soil indicators were not found in upland soils. The wetland boundary typically followed a gradual change in vegetation from wetland to upland plant communities, as well as a distinct change in topography. Basin 2 was identified by the DNR NWI as a PEM1C and was located within an area mapped as Ronneby fine sandy loam by the Web Soil Survey. Sample data sheets 2-UP and 2-WET correspond to this basin. Basin 3 Basin 3 was a PEM1A Type 1 seasonally flooded drainageway dominated by white grass. No primary hydrology indicators were observed at the t ime of the field visit, but the area met hydrology indicators for soil surface cracks, geomorphic position, and the FAC-neutral test. The soils within the drainageway generally exhibited extensive depletions. Adjacent upland was typically sparsely vegetated with some common buckthorn shrubs and a canopy of box elders and oaks. Depletions were not observed in the upland soils. The wetland boundary followed a change in vegetation from FACW vegetation to FAC or FACU vegetation in the upland, following a gradual change in topography. This basin was not identified by the DNR NWI, and was located within an area mapped as Santiago silt loam by the Web Soil Survey. Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW’s-Soil ID-Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environmental Referrals Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking-Tree Surveys-Natural Resource Management Plans 5 Sample data sheets 4-UP and 4-WET correspond to this basin. Confirmation of Jurisdictional Status We are submitting this report to the client and regulatory agencies to request a wetland boundary and type determination. We have enclosed an official WCA Approval of Wetland Type and Boundary form in Appendix D along with a USCOE wetland delineation concurrence request. Conclusion This wetland delineation meets the standards and criteria described in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2012 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation: Northcentral and Northeast Region. This was a Routine On Site Determination and the results reflect the conditions present at the time of the delineation. If any wetland impacts are planned for this project, permits would be necessary from the LGU and other agencies. I certify that I performed the field analysis and wrote the report for this wetland delineation. Thank you for the opportunity to provide wetland services on this important project. 8/3/17 TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURES 1.Site Location Map 2.NWI Map 3.Soils Map 4.PWI Map 5.Wetland Delineation Map 6.Topographic Map 7.Hydric Soils Map APPENDICES A.Precipitation Data B.Sample Data Sheets C.Site Photographs D.Wetland Delineation Approval Forms FIGURES Figure 1 - Site Location Map Located north of 19540 Olinda Trail in Scandia, MN Natio nal Wetla nd Inventory S ou rce : Esri, Dig it alGlob e, Ge oE ye, E arthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS , Aer oG RID, IGN, an d the GIS User Community Ju ly 18 , 2017 steve.kloiber 0 0.1 0.20.0 5 mi 0 0.1 0.20.0 5 km 1:6,616 Figure 2 Soil Map—Washington County, Minnesota (Figure 3 - Soils Map) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/18/2017 Page 1 of 3 50 0 8 8 2 0 50 0 8 8 6 0 50 0 8 9 0 0 50 0 8 9 4 0 50 0 8 9 8 0 50 0 9 0 2 0 50 0 9 0 6 0 50 0 8 8 2 0 50 0 8 8 6 0 50 0 8 9 0 0 50 0 8 9 4 0 50 0 8 9 8 0 50 0 9 0 2 0 50 0 9 0 6 0 513700 513740 513780 513820 513860 513900 513940 513980 514020 514060 513700 513740 513780 513820 513860 513900 513940 513980 514020 514060 45° 14' 5'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 3 2 ' ' W 45° 14' 5'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 1 4 ' ' W 45° 13' 57'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 3 2 ' ' W 45° 13' 57'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 1 4 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 15N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 25 50 100 150 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,720 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 Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features 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 11, Sep 19, 2016 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 16, 2012—Apr 26, 2012 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. Soil Map—Washington County, Minnesota (Figure 3 - Soils Map) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/18/2017 Page 2 of 3 Map Unit Legend Washington County, Minnesota (MN163) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 153B Santiago silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 3.9 44.3% 166 Ronneby fine sandy loam 1.1 12.0% 504B Duluth silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes 3.9 43.7% Totals for Area of Interest 8.8 100.0% Soil Map—Washington County, Minnesota Figure 3 - Soils Map Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/18/2017 Page 3 of 3 Figure 4 - PWI Map Basin 1 Basin 2 2-UP 2-WET 1-WET 1-UP Ditch Area Delineated Drainage way Driveway location Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Washington County, Minnesota (Figure 7 - Hydric Soil Rating) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/18/2017 Page 1 of 5 50 0 8 8 2 0 50 0 8 8 6 0 50 0 8 9 0 0 50 0 8 9 4 0 50 0 8 9 8 0 50 0 9 0 2 0 50 0 9 0 6 0 50 0 8 8 2 0 50 0 8 8 6 0 50 0 8 9 0 0 50 0 8 9 4 0 50 0 8 9 8 0 50 0 9 0 2 0 50 0 9 0 6 0 513700 513740 513780 513820 513860 513900 513940 513980 514020 514060 513700 513740 513780 513820 513860 513900 513940 513980 514020 514060 45° 14' 5'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 3 2 ' ' W 45° 14' 5'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 1 4 ' ' W 45° 13' 57'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 3 2 ' ' W 45° 13' 57'' N 92 ° 4 9 ' 1 4 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 15N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 25 50 100 150 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,720 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 11, Sep 19, 2016 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 16, 2012—Apr 26, 2012 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 (Figure 7 - Hydric Soil Rating) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/18/2017 Page 2 of 5 Hydric Rating by Map Unit Hydric Rating by Map Unit— Summary by Map Unit — Washington County, Minnesota (MN163) Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 153B Santiago silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 0 3.9 44.3% 166 Ronneby fine sandy loam 5 1.1 12.0% 504B Duluth silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes 3 3.9 43.7% Totals for Area of Interest 8.8 100.0% Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Washington County, Minnesota Figure 7 - Hydric Soil Rating Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 7/18/2017 Page 3 of 5 APPENDIX A Precipitation Data Minnesota Climatology Working Group State Climatology Office - DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources     University of Minnesota home | current conditions | journal | past data | summaries | agriculture | other sites | about us | search | Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database Precipitation data for target wetland location: county: Washington township number: 32N township name: New Scandia range number: 20W nearest community: Scandia section number: 27 Aerial photograph or site visit date: Thursday, June 22, 2017 Score using 1981-2010 normal period values are in inches A 'R' following a monthly total indicates a provisional value derived from radar-based estimates. first prior month: May 2017 second prior month: April 2017 third prior month: March 2017 estimated precipitation total for this location:4.74R 4.17R 0.66 there is a 30% chance this location will have less than:2.87 1.86 1.20 there is a 30% chance this location will have more than:4.18 3.37 2.01 type of month: dry normal wet wet wet dry monthly score 3 * 3 = 9 2 * 3 = 6 1 * 1 = 1 multi-month score: 6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)16 (Wet) Other Resources: retrieve daily precipitation data view radar-based precipitation estimates view weekly precipitation maps Evaluating Antecedent Precipitation Conditions (BWSR) Minnesota Climatology Working Group State Climatology Office - DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources     University of Minnesota home | current conditions | journal | past data | summaries | agriculture | other sites | about us | search | Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database Precipitation data for target wetland location: county: Washington township number: 32N township name: New Scandia range number: 20W nearest community: Scandia section number: 27 Aerial photograph or site visit date: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 Score using 1981-2010 normal period values are in inches A 'R' following a monthly total indicates a provisional value derived from radar-based estimates. first prior month: July 2017 second prior month: June 2017 third prior month: May 2017 estimated precipitation total for this location:missing missing 4.74R there is a 30% chance this location will have less than:2.99 3.36 2.87 there is a 30% chance this location will have more than:5.13 5.97 4.18 type of month: dry normal wet missing missing wet monthly score missing missing 1 * 3 = 3 multi-month score: 6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normal) 15 to 18 (wet)missing Other Resources: retrieve daily precipitation data view radar-based precipitation estimates view weekly precipitation maps Evaluating Antecedent Precipitation Conditions (BWSR) 7.504.552.64 normaldry 3 * 1 = 3 2 * 2 = 4 10 - normal Minnesota Climatology Working Group State Climatology Office - DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources     University of Minnesota home | current conditions | journal | past data | summaries | agriculture | other sites | about us | search | Nearest Station Precipitation Data Retrieval Minnesota's precipitation data archive is searched for data closest to a selected target location for each month. Values from the site closest to the target location are returned below after clicking the retrieve monthly data or retrieve daily data buttons. The precipitation data are made up of measured rainfall and the measured liquid content of snowfall. Temperature, snowfall, and snow depth data from National Weather Service reporting stations are no longer retrieved from this application. To obtain those data, see our newest data retrieval tool (May 2014). National Weather Service precipitation data continue to be available from this application. Obtaining data for legal purposes Guide for column headers in the data table target location: Washington-New scandia-Scandia 32N 20W S27 (latitude: 45.23151 longitude: 92.82490) click to select target location years: 2017 to 2017 number of missing days allowed per month: 3 retrieve monthly data retrieve daily data results: Target: T32 R20 S27 mon year cc tttN rrW ss nnnn oooooooo pre (inches) dis Jan 2017 82 31N 20W 30 SWCD .98 6 mi. Feb 2017 82 31N 20W 30 SWCD .65 6 mi. Mar 2017 82 31N 20W 30 SWCD .95 6 mi. Apr 2017 90 31N 19W 9 BYRG 3.42 5 mi. May 2017 90 31N 19W 9 BYRG 7.50 5 mi. Jun 2017 90 31N 19W 9 BYRG 4.55 5 mi. Jul 2017 62 30N 22W 12 SWCD 2.64 12 mi. Aug 2017 m 999 mi. Sep 2017 m 999 mi. Oct 2017 m 999 mi. Nov 2017 m 999 mi. Dec 2017 m 999 mi. Where indicated: Missing values are shown as 'm'. Days on which precip accumulated in the gage are shown as '-'. 'TTTT RR SS' is the 'public land survey(PLS)' or 'legal' location of the observed data. Section values greater 36 are SECTIC 'TIC' locations plus 100. 'NWS ID' the National Weather Service Cooperative station number. Note that the 'PLS' will always be correct for precipitation data while the 'NWS ID' will always be correct for the temperature data. If no PLS info is supplied the the 'NWS ID' number applies to all shown data. State Climatology Office - MnDNR - Ecological and Water Resources APPENDIX B Sample Data Sheets Slope (%): NWI Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Hydric soil present? Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID: Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Thin Muck Surface (C7) 2%Long.: No Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Soil Map Unit Name:Duluth silt loam Lat.: High Water Table (A2) Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Marl Deposits (B15) 6/22/17Sampling Date:Krause - Olinda Trail Driveway Brent Krause 1-UPSampling Point:MN Project/Site:City/County: Applicant/Owner:State: Scandia Investigator(s):CMC Section, Township, Range: Datum: Sec. 27, T32N, R20W (If no, explain in remarks) Are "normal circumstances" present? Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):hillslope Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Yes SUMMARY OF FINDINGS N N Y Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Saturation (A3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Drift Deposits (B3) Sediment Deposits (B2) WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region >24 Yes According to three month antecedent precipitation data, sampling was conducted during wetter than normal climate conditions N HYDROLOGY No Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) No Indicators of wetland hydrology present?N Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) convex Drainage Patterns (B10) No X Moss Trim Lines (B16) (includes capillary fringe) Field Observations: Surface water present? Water table present? Saturation present? Depth (inches):Yes X Depth (inches):>24 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Yes X -Depth (inches): US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region N N NNN N 50/20 Thresholds Tree Stratum 1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum 2 Herb Stratum 3 Woody Vine Stratum 4 5 Dominance Test Worksheet 6 7 8 (A) 9 10 (B) =Total Cover (A/B) 1 Prevalence Index Worksheet 2 Total % Cover of: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 6 FACU species x 4 = 7 UPL species x 5 = 8 Column totals (A)(B) 9 Prevalence Index = B/A = 10 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation X Dominance test is >50% 1 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 =Total Cover 1 2 3 4 5 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 50%20% 19 5 14 13 35 Sampling Point:1-UPVEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 N Indicator Status Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 25 0 190 0 35 0 95 Galium boreale 30' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Solidago canadensis 5 FACU Woody Vine Stratum Plot Size ( Matteuccia struthiopteris 10 N FAC Parthenocissus quinquefolia 5 N FACU 5 N FACAmphicarpaea bracteata 5 N FAC Taraxacum officinale 5 N FACU 25 Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Bryophyte spp 60 Y FAC Rhamnus cathartica 10 Y FAC Dominant Species Indicator Status Alnus incana 15 Y N FACW 70 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute % Cover Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10 Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius 20 Populus tremuloides Quercus rubra 0 140 390 50 0 )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status 40 Y Y FAC FACU FACW Y Hydrophytic vegetation present? *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. 580 4 80.00% 3.05 5 130 48 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21) Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: 100 sandy clay loam sandy loam Type* Redox Features Texture loam0-6 10010YR4/2 Sampling Point:1-UPSOIL *Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Depth (Inches) Matrix %Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc** 20-24 10YR4/2 100 6-20 10YR3/2 Remarks Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): NHydric soil present? Hydric Soil Indicators: Type: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Slope (%): NWI Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Hydric soil present? Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID: Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) X X Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Thin Muck Surface (C7) 2%Long.: No Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Soil Map Unit Name:Duluth silt loam Lat.: High Water Table (A2) Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Marl Deposits (B15) 6/22/17Sampling Date:Krause - Olinda Trail Driveway Brent Krause 1-WETSampling Point:MN Project/Site:City/County: Applicant/Owner:State: Scandia Investigator(s):CMC Section, Township, Range: Datum: Sec. 27, T32N, R20W (If no, explain in remarks) Are "normal circumstances" present? Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):depression Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Yes SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Y Y Y Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Saturation (A3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Drift Deposits (B3) Sediment Deposits (B2) WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region 3 Yes X According to three month antecedent precipitation data, sampling was conducted during wetter than normal climate conditions Y X HYDROLOGY No Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) No Indicators of wetland hydrology present?Y Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) PEM1C concave Drainage Patterns (B10) No Moss Trim Lines (B16) (includes capillary fringe) Field Observations: Surface water present? Water table present? Saturation present? Depth (inches):Yes Depth (inches):surface Shallow Aquitard (D3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Yes X -Depth (inches): US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region N N NNN N 50/20 Thresholds Tree Stratum 1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum 2 Herb Stratum 3 Woody Vine Stratum 4 5 Dominance Test Worksheet 6 7 8 (A) 9 10 (B) =Total Cover (A/B) 1 Prevalence Index Worksheet 2 Total % Cover of: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 6 FACU species x 4 = 7 UPL species x 5 = 8 Column totals (A)(B) 9 Prevalence Index = B/A = 10 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation X Dominance test is >50% 1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 =Total Cover 1 2 3 4 5 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 50%20% 19 0 0 0 0 Sampling Point:1-WETVEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 Indicator Status Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 90 0 95 0 0 0 95 30' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Woody Vine Stratum Plot Size ( Bryophyte spp 5 N FAC 0 Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Phalaris arundinacea 90 Y FACW Dominant Species Indicator Status 0 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute % Cover Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius 0 0 15 180 0 )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Y Hydrophytic vegetation present? *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. 195 1 100.00% 2.05 1 5 48 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) X Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21) Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: 97 7.5YR4/6 sandy clay loam PL sandy loam Type* Redox Features Texture mucky loam0-5 10010YR3/2 Sampling Point:1-WETSOIL *Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix 3 C PL Depth (Inches) Matrix %Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc** 20-24 10YR5/2 97 7.5YR4/6 5-20 10YR4/1 Remarks 3 C Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): Y X Hydric soil present? Hydric Soil Indicators: Type: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Slope (%): NWI Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Hydric soil present? Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID: Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Moss Trim Lines (B16) (includes capillary fringe) Field Observations: Surface water present? Water table present? Saturation present? Depth (inches):Yes X Depth (inches):>24 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Yes X -Depth (inches): WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region >24 Yes According to three month antecedent precipitation data, sampling was conducted during wetter than normal climate conditions N HYDROLOGY No Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) No Indicators of wetland hydrology present?N Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) convex Drainage Patterns (B10) No X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Yes SUMMARY OF FINDINGS N N Y Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Saturation (A3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Investigator(s):CMC Section, Township, Range: Datum: Sec. 27, T32N, R20W (If no, explain in remarks) Are "normal circumstances" present? Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):hillslope 6/22/17Sampling Date:Krause - Olinda Trail Driveway Brent Krause 2-UPSampling Point:MN Project/Site:City/County: Applicant/Owner:State: Scandia Thin Muck Surface (C7) 4%Long.: No Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Soil Map Unit Name:Ronneby fine sandy loam Lat.: High Water Table (A2) Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Marl Deposits (B15) Drift Deposits (B3) Sediment Deposits (B2) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region N N NNN N 50/20 Thresholds Tree Stratum 1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum 2 Herb Stratum 3 Woody Vine Stratum 4 5 Dominance Test Worksheet 6 7 8 (A) 9 10 (B) =Total Cover (A/B) 1 Prevalence Index Worksheet 2 Total % Cover of: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 6 FACU species x 4 = 7 UPL species x 5 = 8 Column totals (A)(B) 9 Prevalence Index = B/A = 10 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation X Dominance test is >50% 1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 =Total Cover 1 2 3 4 5 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Y Hydrophytic vegetation present? *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. 475 3 60.00% 2.97 5 60 35 0 Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius Fraxinus pennsylvanica 75 100 180 120 0 )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status 50 Y FACW Y FAC 50 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute % Cover Prunus serotina 20 Y FACU Dominant Species Indicator Status Rhamnus cathartica 20 40 Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Bryophyte spp 30 Y FAC 5 N FAC Onoclea sensibilis 5 N FACW Carex pennsylvanica 15 Y UPL Galium boreale 5 N FAC 5 N FACUTaraxacum officinale Anemone canadensis 5 FACW Woody Vine Stratum Plot Size ( Rhamnus cathartica 30' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species 0 70 Sampling Point:2-UPVEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 N Indicator Status Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 60 0 160 15 25 25% bare ground at this sample point Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 50%20% 14 8 10 20 25 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21) Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): NHydric soil present? Hydric Soil Indicators: Type: Sampling Point:2-UPSOIL *Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Depth (Inches) Matrix %Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc** 6-24 10YR4/3 RemarksType* Redox Features Texture loam0-6 10010YR4/2 100 sandy loam US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Slope (%): NWI Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Hydric soil present? Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID: Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) X X Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Thin Muck Surface (C7) 2%Long.: No Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Soil Map Unit Name:Ronneby fine sandy loam Lat.: High Water Table (A2) Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Marl Deposits (B15) 6/22/17Sampling Date:Krause - Olinda Trail Driveway Brent Krause 2-WETSampling Point:MN Project/Site:City/County: Applicant/Owner:State: Scandia Investigator(s):CMC Section, Township, Range: Datum: Sec. 27, T32N, R20W (If no, explain in remarks) Are "normal circumstances" present? Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):depression Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Yes SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Y Y Y Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Saturation (A3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Drift Deposits (B3) Sediment Deposits (B2) WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region 4 Yes X According to three month antecedent precipitation data, sampling was conducted during wetter than normal climate conditions Y X HYDROLOGY No Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) No Indicators of wetland hydrology present?Y Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) PEM1C concave Drainage Patterns (B10) No Moss Trim Lines (B16) (includes capillary fringe) Field Observations: Surface water present? Water table present? Saturation present? Depth (inches):Yes Depth (inches):surface Shallow Aquitard (D3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Yes X -Depth (inches): US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region N N NNN N 50/20 Thresholds Tree Stratum 1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum 2 Herb Stratum 3 Woody Vine Stratum 4 5 Dominance Test Worksheet 6 7 8 (A) 9 10 (B) =Total Cover (A/B) 1 Prevalence Index Worksheet 2 Total % Cover of: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 6 FACU species x 4 = 7 UPL species x 5 = 8 Column totals (A)(B) 9 Prevalence Index = B/A = 10 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation X Dominance test is >50% 1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 =Total Cover 1 2 3 4 5 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 50%20% 19 0 0 0 0 Sampling Point:2-WETVEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 Indicator Status Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 95 0 95 0 0 0 95 30' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Woody Vine Stratum Plot Size ( 0 Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Phalaris arundinacea 95 Y FACW Dominant Species Indicator Status 0 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute % Cover Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius 0 0 0 190 0 )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Y Hydrophytic vegetation present? *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. 190 1 100.00% 2.00 1 0 48 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) X Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21) Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: 97 7.5YR4/6 PL sandy clay loam Type* Redox Features Texture loam0-6 10010YR3/2 Sampling Point:2-WETSOIL *Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Depth (Inches) Matrix %Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc** 6-24 10YR4/2 Remarks 3 C Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): YHydric soil present? Hydric Soil Indicators: Type: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Slope (%): NWI Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Hydric soil present? Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID: Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: 8/2/17Sampling Date:Krause - Olinda Trail Driveway Brent Krause 4-UPSampling Point:MN Project/Site:City/County: Applicant/Owner:State: Scandia Investigator(s):CMC Section, Township, Range: Datum: Sec. 27, T32N, R20W (If no, explain in remarks) Are "normal circumstances" present? Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):hillslope 1%Long.: Yes Soil Map Unit Name:Santiago silt loam Lat.: Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Saturation (A3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Marl Deposits (B15) Drift Deposits (B3) Sediment Deposits (B2) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Yes SUMMARY OF FINDINGS N N Y High Water Table (A2) Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region >24 Yes N HYDROLOGY No Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) No Indicators of wetland hydrology present?N Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) convex Drainage Patterns (B10) No X Moss Trim Lines (B16) (includes capillary fringe) Field Observations: Surface water present? Water table present? Saturation present? Depth (inches):Yes X Depth (inches):>24 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Yes X -Depth (inches): Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region N N N NN N 50/20 Thresholds Tree Stratum 1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum 2 Herb Stratum 3 Woody Vine Stratum 4 5 Dominance Test Worksheet 6 7 8 (A) 9 10 (B) =Total Cover (A/B) 1 Prevalence Index Worksheet 2 Total % Cover of: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 6 FACU species x 4 = 7 UPL species x 5 = 8 Column totals (A)(B) 9 Prevalence Index = B/A = 10 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation X Dominance test is >50% 1 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 =Total Cover 1 2 3 4 5 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) 50% bare ground at this sample point Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 50%20% 9 4 19 10 48 Sampling Point:4-UPVEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 Indicator Status Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 30 0 160 0 50 0 45 Woody Vine Stratum Plot Size ( Amphicarpaea bracteata 30' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Rhamnus cathartica 10 Y FAC Leersia virginica 10 Y FACW 5 N FACMatteuccia struthiopteris 5 N FAC 20 Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Parthenocissus quinquefolia 15 Y FACU Dominant Species Indicator Status Rhamnus cathartica 20 Y N Y N FAC 95 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute % Cover FACU FAC 15 5 Quercus rubra Acer rubrum Betula papyrifera Populus tremuloides 20 15 Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius 20 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Acer negundo 0 200 240 60 0 )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status 20 Y Y FACW FAC N FACU FAC Y Hydrophytic vegetation present? *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. 500 5 71.43% 3.13 7 80 23 0 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21) Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: 80 7.5YR4/6 PL silt Type* Redox Features Texture silt loam0-8 10010YR4/3 Sampling Point:4-UPSOIL *Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Depth (Inches) Matrix %Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc** 8-24 10YR4/4 Remarks 20 C Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): NHydric soil present? Hydric Soil Indicators: Type: US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Slope (%): NWI Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Hydrophytic vegetation present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Hydric soil present? Indicators of wetland hydrology present?If yes, optional wetland site ID: Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) X X X Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Moss Trim Lines (B16) (includes capillary fringe) Field Observations: Surface water present? Water table present? Saturation present? Depth (inches):Yes X Depth (inches):>24 Shallow Aquitard (D3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Yes X -Depth (inches): WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Northcentral and Northeast Region >24 Yes Y HYDROLOGY No Microtopographic Relief (D4) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) No Indicators of wetland hydrology present?Y Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) PEM1A concave Drainage Patterns (B10) No X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Yes SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Y Y Y Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Saturation (A3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Investigator(s):CMC Section, Township, Range: Datum: Sec. 27, T32N, R20W (If no, explain in remarks) Are "normal circumstances" present? Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):Local relief (concave, convex, none):depression 8/2/17Sampling Date:Krause - Olinda Trail Driveway Brent Krause 4-WETSampling Point:MN Project/Site:City/County: Applicant/Owner:State: Scandia Thin Muck Surface (C7) 2%Long.: Yes Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Soil Map Unit Name:Santiago silt loam Lat.: High Water Table (A2) Surface Water (A1) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Marl Deposits (B15) Drift Deposits (B3) Sediment Deposits (B2) US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region N N NNN N NN N 50/20 Thresholds Tree Stratum 1 Sapling/Shrub Stratum 2 Herb Stratum 3 Woody Vine Stratum 4 5 Dominance Test Worksheet 6 7 8 (A) 9 10 (B) =Total Cover (A/B) 1 Prevalence Index Worksheet 2 Total % Cover of: 3 OBL species x 1 = 4 FACW species x 2 = 5 FAC species x 3 = 6 FACU species x 4 = 7 UPL species x 5 = 8 Column totals (A)(B) 9 Prevalence Index = B/A = 10 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation X Dominance test is >50% 1 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 =Total Cover 1 2 3 4 5 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Y Hydrophytic vegetation present? *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Definitions of Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vines - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in height. 430 4 100.00% 2.21 4 40 48 0 Tree Stratum Plot Size (30' radius 30 Ulmus americana Fraxinus pennsylvanica 0 0 120 310 0 )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status 35 Y Y FACW FACW FAC FAC Acer negundo Acer rubrum 15 10 Y N N FAC 90 Sapling/Shrub Stratum Plot Size (15' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Rhamnus cathartica 10 10 Herb Stratum Plot Size (5' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species Indicator Status Leersia virginica 90 Y FACW Rhamnus cathartica 5 N FAC Woody Vine Stratum Plot Size ( 30' radius )Absolute % Cover Dominant Species 0 95 Sampling Point:4-WETVEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants Morphogical adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 Indicator Status Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Total Number of Dominant Species Across 155 0 195 0 0 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 50%20% 19 2 18 5 45 US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Histisol (A1)2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 149B Histic Epipedon (A2)Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Black Histic (A3)5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L Stratified Layers (A5)Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR K, L) Depleted Below Dark Suface (A11)Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR K, L) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)X Depleted Matrix (F3)Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Dark Surface (F6)Mesic Spodic (TA6) (MLRA 144A, 145, 149B) Sandy Redox (S5)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)Red Parent Material (F21) Stripped Matrix (S6)Redox Depressions (F8)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if observed): Remarks: Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR R, MLRA Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR R, MLRA 149B Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR K, L) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR R, MLRA 149B) Depth (inches): YHydric soil present? Hydric Soil Indicators: Type: Sampling Point:4-WETSOIL *Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix 30 RM M Depth (Inches) Matrix %Color (moist)Color (moist)%Loc** 10YR6/1 4-24 10YR5/2 Remarks 10 C Type* Redox Features Texture siltPLC0-4 47.5YR4/69610YR4/2 60 7.5YR4/6 silt PL silt US Army Corps of Engineers Northcentral and Northeast Region APPENDIX C Site Photographs Sample point 1-UP Sample point 1-WET Basin 1 Continuation of Basin 1 to the northeast Sample point 2-UP Sample point 2-WET Basin 2 APPENDIX D Wetland Delineation Approval Forms Project Name and/or Number: PART ONE: Applicant Information If applicant is an entity (company, government entity, partnership, etc.), an authorized contact person must be identified. If the applicant is using an agent (consultant, lawyer, or other third party) and has authorized them to act on their behalf , the agent’s contact information must also be provided. Applicant/Landowner Name: Brent Krause Mailing Address: 17590 Henna St, Hugo, MN 55038 Phone: E-mail Address: bkrause@c-70builders.com Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above): Mailing Address: Phone: E-mail Address: Agent Name: Wayne Jacobson, WPC, PSS, Jacobson Environmental Mailing Address: 5821 Humboldt Ave N, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Phone: (612) 802-6619 E-mail Address: jacobsonenv@msn.com PART TWO: Site Location Information County: Washington City/Township: Scandia Parcel ID and/or Address: 27.032.20.13.0003 Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): Section 27, T32N, R20W Lat/Long (decimal degrees): Attach a map showing the location of the site in relation to local streets, roads, highways. See Figure 1 Approximate size of site (acres) or if a linear project, length (feet): 10 acres If you know that your proposal will require an individual Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, you must provide the names and addresses of all property owners adjacent to the project site. This information may be provided by attaching a list to your application or by using block 25 of the Application for Department of the Army permit which can be obtained at: http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Portals/57/docs/regulatory/RegulatoryDocs/engform_4345_2012oct.pdf PART THREE: General Project/Site Information If this application is related to a delineation approval, exemption determination, jurisdictional determination, or other correspondence submitted prior to this application then describe that here and provide the Corps of Engineers project number. Describe the project that is being proposed, the project purpose and need, and schedule for implementation and completion. The project description must fully describe the nature and scope of the proposed activity including a description of all project elements that effect aquatic resources (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) and must also include plans and cross section or profile drawings showing the location, character, and dimensions of all proposed activities and aquatic resource impacts. Driveway crossing the ditch connecting Basins 1 & 2 Project Name and/or Number: PART FOUR: Aquatic Resource Impact1 Summary If your proposed project involves a direct or indirect impact to an aquatic resource (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) identify each impact in the table below. Include all anticipated impacts, including those expected to be temporary. Attach an overhead view map, aerial photo, and/or drawing showing all of the aquatic resources in the project area and the location(s) of the proposed impacts. Label each aquatic resource on the map with a reference number or letter and identify the impacts in the following table. Aquatic Resource ID (as noted on overhead view) Aquatic Resource Type (wetland, lake, tributary etc.) Type of Impact (fill, excavate, drain, or remove vegetation) Duration of Impact Permanent (P) or Temporary (T)1 Size of Impact2 Overall Size of Aquatic Resource 3 Existing Plant Community Type(s) in Impact Area4 County, Major Watershed #, and Bank Service Area # of Impact Area5 1If impacts are temporary; enter the duration of the impacts in days next to the “T”. For example, a project with a temporary access fill that would be removed after 220 days would be entered “T (220)”. 2Impacts less than 0.01 acre should be reported in square feet. Impacts 0.01 acre or greater should be reported as acres and rounded to the nearest 0.01 acre. Tributary impacts must be reported in linear feet of impact and an area of impact by indicating first the linear feet of impact along the flowline of the stream followed by the area impact in parentheses). For example, a project that impacts 50 feet of a stream that is 6 feet wide would be reported as 50 ft (300 square feet). 3This is generally only applicable if you are applying for a de minimis exemption under MN Rules 8420.0420 Subp. 8, otherwise enter “N/A”. 4Use Wetland Plants and Plant Community Types of Minnesota and Wisconsin 3rd Ed. as modified in MN Rules 8420.0405 Subp. 2. 5Refer to Major Watershed and Bank Service Area maps in MN Rules 8420.0522 Subp. 7. If any of the above identified impacts have already occurred, identify which impacts they are and the circumstances associated with each: PART FIVE: Applicant Signature Check here if you are requesting a pre-application consultation with the Corps and LGU based on the information you have provided. Regulatory entities will not initiate a formal application review if this box is checked. By signature below, I attest that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further attest that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein. Signature: Date: I hereby authorize Wayne Jacobson to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this application. 1 The term “impact” as used in this joint application form is a generic term used for disclosure purposes to identify activities that may require approval from one or more regulatory agencies. For purposes of this form it is not meant to indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement. Project Name and/or Number: Attachment A Request for Delineation Review, Wetland Type Determination, or Jurisdictional Determination By submission of the enclosed wetland delineation report, I am requesting that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District (Corps) and/or the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (LGU) provide me with the following (check all that apply): Wetland Type Confirmation Delineation Concurrence. Concurrence with a delineation is a written notification from the Corps and a decision from the LGU concurring, not concurring, or commenting on the boundaries of the aqu atic resources delineated on the property. Delineation concurrences are generally valid for five years unless site conditions change. Under this request alone, the Corps will not a ddress the jurisdictional status of the aquatic resources on the property, only the boundaries of the resources within the review area (including wetlands, tributaries, lakes, etc.). Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination. A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) is a non-binding written indication from the Corps that waters, including wetlands, identified on a parcel may be waters of the United States. For purposes of computation of impacts and compensatory mitigation requirements, a permit decision made on the basis of a PJD will treat all waters and wetlands in the review area as if they are jurisdictional waters o f the U.S. PJDs are advisory in nature and may not be appealed. Approved Jurisdictional Determination. An approved jurisdictional determination (AJD) is an official Corps determination that jurisdictional waters of the United States are either present or absent on the property. AJDs can generally be relied upon by the affected party for five years. An AJD may be appealed through the Corps administrative appeal process. In order for the Corps and LGU to process your request, the wetland delineation must be prep ared in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, any approved Regional Supplements to the 1987 Manual, and the Guidelines for Submitting Wetland Delineations in Minnesota (2013). http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/DelineationJDGuidance.aspx X X X