Laserfiche WebLink
Plants were identified using standard regional plant keys. Taxonomy and indicator status of <br /> plant species was taken from the 2012 National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar, R.W. and Kartesz, <br /> J.T. 2009.North American Digital Flora: National Wetland Plant List,version 2.4.0 <br /> (https://wetland�lants.usace.army.mil). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and <br /> Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover,NH, and <br /> BONAP, Chapel Hill,NC.) <br /> III. RESULTS <br /> Review of Soils,NWI,and DNR Information <br /> The National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) (Excelsior Quadrangle, U.S. Fish& Wildlife <br /> Service 1999)showed PEMF/PEMC wetland complex within site boundaries(Figure 3). <br /> The Soil Survey of Hennepin County,Minnesota <br /> (http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geography/ssurgo� 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 and at least one component is rated as not hydric. <br /> SMU Ma Unit Name H dric? <br /> L24A Glencoe loam, depressional, 0 to 1 percent slopes All Hydric <br /> L35A Lerdal loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes Partially Hydric <br /> L37B Angus loam,morainic, 2 to 5 percent slopes Partially Hydric <br /> L41C2 Lester-Kilkenny complex, 6 to 12 percent slopes,eroded Partially Hydric <br /> L49A Klossner soils, depressional, 0 to 1 percent slopes All Hydric <br /> L 132A Hamel-Glencoe,depressional,complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes Partially Hydric <br /> The DNR Protected Waters Map,Hennepin County(http://deli.dnr.state.mn.usn showed DNR <br /> Protected Wetland 842W in the southwest corner of the site (Figure 5). <br /> Wetland Determinations and Delineations <br /> Potential wetlands were evaluated in greater detail during field observations on April 12,2012. <br /> Three wetlands were identified and delineated on the subject site(Figure 2). Corresponding <br /> data forms are included in Appendix A. The following description of the wetlands and adjacent <br /> upland reflects conditions observed at the time of the field visit. At that time new-growth <br /> herbaceous vegetation and tree and shrub leaves were present. Wetland hydrology was assumed <br /> to be normal for that date based normal precipitation amounts for March and April (Appendix <br /> B). The survey of the wetland boundaries is presented in Appendix C. MNRAM analysis <br /> results are included in Appendix D. <br /> Wetland 1 was a Type 4 (PEMF/PEMC/PEMB)deep marsh, shallow marsh, and fresh meadow <br /> wetland complex dominated by cattail reed canary grass,and lake sedge with lesser amounts of <br /> jewelweed, stinging nettle, and giant goldenrod. Soils observed below the wetland boundary <br /> 3 <br />