Laserfiche WebLink
' � <br /> Botanical Garden, 1991). Indicator status of plant species was taken from the 2412 National <br /> Wetland Plant List (Lichvar,R.W.and Kartesz,J.T. 2009.North American Digital Flora: � <br /> National Wetland Plant List,version 2.4.0 (https://wetland�lants.usace.army.mil). U.S.Army <br /> Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and <br /> Engineering Laboratory, Hanover,NH, and BONAP, Chapel Hill,NC.) <br /> III. RESULTS <br /> Review of Soils,NWI,and DNR Information <br /> The National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) (Mound Quadrangle,U.S.Fish&Wildlife Service <br /> 1989)showed one PUBGx/PEMA wetland within the site boundaries(Figure 3). <br /> The Soi[Survey of Hennepin County,Minnesota <br /> (http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geography/ssurgon showed the following soil types within or near <br /> site boundaries(Figure 4). Partially hydric means that at least one component of the map unit is <br /> � rated as hydric. <br /> SMTJ Map Unit Name H dric? <br /> L22E Lester loam, morainic, 18 to 25 percent slopes Partiall h dric <br /> L23A Cordova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Partiall h dric <br /> L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 1 to 4 percent slopes Partially hydric <br /> L40B Angus-Kilkenny complex,2 to 6 percent slopes Partiall hydric <br /> L41C2 Lester-Kilkenny complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded partiall h dric <br /> L41E Lester-Kilkenny complex, 18 to 25 percent slopes Partially h dric <br /> The DNR Protected Waters Map,Hennepin County(http://deli.dnr.state.mn.us� did not show <br /> any DNR Protected Waters, Waterways,or Wetlands within or near site boundaries(Figure 5). <br /> Wetland Determinations and Delineations <br /> Potential wetlands were evaluated in greater detail during field observations on October 1, 2012. <br /> One wetland was identified and delineated on the subject site(Figure 2). Corresponding data <br /> forms are included in Appendix A. The following description of the wetland and adjacent <br /> upland reflects conditions observed at the time of the field visit. At that time,herbaceous <br /> vegetation was actively growing and temperatures were typical of the season. Wetland <br /> hydrology was assumed to be drier than typical for that date based on below normal precipitation <br /> amounts in for the preceding 30 days(Appendix B). The survey of the wetland boundary is <br /> presented in Appendix C. <br /> Wetland 1 was a Type 4 (PUBGx/PEMA) excavated, open water and fresh (wet)meadow <br /> wetland complex. The PUBGx portion of the wetland was un-vegetated and dry. The center of <br /> the basin was an upland knoll dominated by a canopy of boxelder. For the purposes of this <br /> delineation it was included within the wetland boundary. Fresh (wet)meadow was dominated by <br /> reed canary grass with lesser amounts of giant goldenrod and Canada thistle. Other non- <br /> 3 <br />