Notice of Decision - MN wetland conservation act

Home Browse Search

,� , � � Plants were identified using standard regional plant keys. Taxonoiny and indicator status of plant species was taken from the 2014 National Wetland Plant List (U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers 2014. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.2, https://wetland�la�lts.usacc.ann. .1�� Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH). III. RESULTS Review of NWI, Soils, and DNR Information The National Wetlands Inveiitofy (NWI) (Minnesota Geospatial Commons 2009-2014, https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-nat-wetlands-inv-2009-2014) showed no wetlands present within the site boundaries (Figure 3). The Soil Survey of Hennepin County, Minnesota (http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geo�raphy/ssur�o/) showed Cordova loam (Predominantly Hydric) as the only soil type present within the site boundaries. A soils map indicating the soil types present within the parcel is included in Figure 4. A table of soil series data and hydric ratings is shown below. Map Map unit name Hydric Rating Acres in Percent of unit AOI AOI s mbol L23A Cordova loam Predominantly Hydric 2.45 100% The Minnesota DNR Public Waters Map, Hennepin County (https://�isdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-mn-public-waters) showed one DNR Public Wetland (27- 839 W) approximately 300 feet west of the site (Figure 5). The National Hydrography Dataset(U.S. Geological Survey, http://nhd.usgs.gov/) showed no water features within 1000 feet of the site boundaries (Figure 6). Wetland Determinations and Delineations Potential wetlands were evaluated in greater detail during field observations on April 19, 2016. Four wetlands were identified and delineated on the property (Figure 2). Corresponding data forms are included ii� Appendix A. The following description of the wetlands and the adjacent upland reflects conditions observed at the time of the field visit. The field visit was conducted during the growing season with actively growing vegetation present on the site, as well as identifiable senesced vegetation from the previous growing season. Precipitation conditions were below the nonnal range based on available 30-day rolling precipitation data, and typical based on the gridded database method (3-month antecedent conditions) (Appendix B). Wetlmzd 1 was a Type 2 (PEMB) wet meadow wetland dominated by reed canary grass and redosier dogwood with a trace of cattail and scattered willow sllrubs. At the time of the field visit Wetland 1 was saturated at the surface. 3