HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetland delineation report-2015 �i �:i»� R�\ i I; i t)t5111 ; i!til;
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
Freshwater Foundation
2500 Shadywood Rd.
Excelsior, MN
June 3, 2015
Prepared By:
Cross River Consulting, LLC
�
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................. 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................ 2
1.1 Purpose of Wetland Delineation.......:.......................................................... 2
1.2 Project Location and Description.......r.......................................................... 2
1.3 Contact Information........................�................................................................. 2
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND FIELD COI�DITIONS............................................ 2
3.0 METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................. 3
4.0 RESULTS........................................J.......................................................... 4
5.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................. 6
ATTACHMENNTS
Figures
• Figure 1 Project Location 1WIap
• Figure 2 Aerial Imagery and LiDAR Topography
• Figure 3 Soils Map
• Figure 4 NWI and MNDNR Public Waters
• Figure 5 Wetland Features Map
• Figure 6 Freshwater Foundation-Certificate of Survey
USACE Wetland Delineation Data Forms
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Cross River Consulting,LLC(CRC)conduc�ed wetland surveys for the Freshwater Foundation on November 6,2014.
The Freshwater Foundation property is located at 2500 Shadywood Road,Orono,Minnesota,and includes two
adjoining parcels(Lot 8,Block 1,The Marsh at Layayette,and Tract B,RLS No.1630)that tota17.71 acres.Two
wetlands were identified and include a large wetland complex that extends along the entire north and east boundary
of the property. A second wetland is located near the southeast corner of the property and is associated with a
stormwater ponding area and drainageway. Wetlands on the property are a mixture shallow marsh,deep marsh,
and hardwood swamp. The total area of wetland on Lot 8,Block 1,The Marsh at Lafayette,is 0.59 acres(25,806
square feet). T'he total area of wetland on Tract B,RLS No.1630 is 0.59 acres(25,530 square feet).
Freshwater Foundation ; Pape 1 Wetland Delineation Report
Cross River Consulting, LLC June 3, 2015
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This wetland delineation report is prepared by Goss River Consulting, LLC far the Freshwater Foundation property
(Property).This report describes site conditions,wetland delineation methodology and wetland delineation results.
1.1 Project Location and Description
The Freshwater Foundation property(Property)is located in Section 20,Township 117N,Range 23W,Hennepin
County,Minnesota. The property address is 2500 Shadywood Road,Orono,Minnesota(see Figure 1). The property
includes two adjoining parcels(Lot 8,Block 1,The Marsh At Layayette,and Tract B,RLS No.1630)that total 7.71
acres.
1.2 Purpose of Wetland Delineation
This purpose of this wetland delineation is to identify wetland resources as part of a review of development
alternatives for the property.
1.3 Contact Information
Wetland Delineator Project A�licant
Mr.Anthony DeMars, PWS Mr.Steve Woods
Cross River Consulting,LLC Executive Director
390912w Ave.South Freshwater Society
Minneapolis,MN 55407 2500 Shadywood Rd.
612-360-0928 Excelsior,MN 55331
Ton�°«,a os�ri��.c<im s����xx�si�,�frc5hti�atcr.urQ
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND FIELD CONDITIONS
The wetland delineation field work v��as completed by Anthony DeMars of Cross River Consulting,LLC(CRC)on
November 6,2014.Weather conditions were cloudy with daytime temperatures of 45°F. At the time of the survey,
many of the herbaceous plants had died back following earlier frosts;however,sedges,grasses,ferns and many of
the dried remains of herbaceous plants were visible and identifiable.
Topography
Topographic contours are shown in Figure 2. Elevations within and immediately adjacent to the property range from
968 feet at the northwest corner of the property to 930 feet within the wetland basin that extends along the north and
east boundary of the property. The northern two thirds of the property slopes moderately to the northeast and then
levels off within the wetland basin. Hill slopes steepen near the north boundary of the property.Topography on the
south one third of the property is gently sloping and includes a drainageway and small wetland basin at the
southeast corner.
Vegetation and Land Cover
The Freshwater Foundation building and parking facilities are located on the north half of the property. To the
north and east of the building and parking area,upland areas are dominated by maple-basswood forest and small
areas of maintained grass with scattered cottonwood trees. South of the building,upland areas are dominated by a
mix of maple-basswood forest and lowland hardwood forest/woodland. Wetland areas are a mixture of emergent
marsh,shrub swamp and hardwood swamp wetland communities.
Soils
Soil map units are shown in Figure 3 and summarized in Table 1.Upland soils are comprised primarily of Lester and
Angus loams with slope classes ranging from 18-25%to 2-5%. The north and east boundary of the property extends
into Muskego,Blue Earth and Houghton soils,which are organic soils and classified as all hydric. Both upland and
Freshwater Foundation Pape 2 Wetland Delineation Report
Cross River Consulting, LLC lune 3, 2015
wetland areas on the south portion of the pr,operty are mapped as Udorthents. These soiis are associated with cut
and fill areas that were graded at some time in the past.
Table 1—Summary of Soils
Map Soil Name Hydric Class
Symbol
L22E Lester loam,morainic,18 to 25 rcent slo es Partiall h dric
Urban land-ildorthents(cut and fill land)
U6B com lex,0 to 6 rcent slo es Unknown
L37B An us loam,morainic,2 to 5 rcent slo es Partiall h dric
Houghton anQl Muskego soils,depressional,0
L50A to 1 ercent slo es All h dric
Muskego,Blule Earth,and Houghton soils,
L16A onded,0 to 1 rcent slo s All h dric
L376 An us loam, orainic,2 to 5 ercent slo es Partiall h dric �
Lester loam,morainic,6 to 12 percent slopes,
L22C2 eroded Partiall h dric
Udorthents,wet substratum,0 to 2 percent
U2A slo es Unknown
Hydrology
Drainage on the property is generally to the east to a large wetland basin that connects to Lafayette Bay,Lake
Minnetonka. A small wetland basin is located within a drainageway that extends northeast through the south part of
the property. This wetland basin,which rec�ives stormwater runoff from Shadywood Road and possibly from areas
southwest of Shadywood Road,may have been created to treat local stormwater. Whether this area was historically
wetland is unknown and would require furtHer review. Hydrology within the large wetland complex that extends
along the north and east boundary of the property is a combination of surface water runoff and high water tables
reflecting local ground water mnditions.
Antecedent Precipitation and Climatic Cond�tions
The multi-month score for the prior three mo�ths gridded precipitation database at Spring Park,Minnesota was not
available due to the late date of the delineation. The most recent months that precipitation is available(August and
September,2014),are ranked as normal and c�ry,respectively. This data is consistent with soil moisture and water
table levels observed during the field survey,jwhen conditions appeared to be dry.
3.0 METHODOLOGY '
The methodology of the 1987 Army Corps of�ngineer Wetland Delineation Manual and Regional Supplement for the
Midwest Region were used to delineate wetl ds on the property.In advance of field survey work,a desktop review
of available data(see Figures 2 and 3)was co�pleted to identify potential wetiand areas.
T'he desktop review utilized U.S.Fish and Wildiife Service National Wetland Inventory data,Natural Resources
Conservation Service soil survey data,LiDAI�2-foot topographic contours and 2013 aerial imagery.T'he entire survey
area was then walked,with all potential wetl�nd areas inspected.Where wetlands were determined to exist,a
wetland and upland observation point was ta�cen along a transect perpendicular to the wetland/upland boundary.
Freshwater Foundation 'i Pape 3 Wetland Delineation Reaort
Cross River Consulting, LLC June 3, 2015
ObserUation Point Data Collection
The Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region(Version 2.0)for
Minnesota was used to guide data collection and evaluation at each observation point as follows:
• Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: At each observation point a nested(30,15 and 5 foot radius)plot was
taken for the tree/woody vine,shrub,herb stratums. Species and percent cover for each stratum were
recorded and both the dominance test and prevalence index applied to determine if hydrophyric vegetation
was dominant. Species nomenclature and indicator status were taken from the current National Wetland
Plant List.
• Hydric Soil Indicators: At each observation point,a soil pit was excavated to a depth of approximately 20
inches.Soil color,texture,organic content and presence of redoximorphic features were noted within each
distinct soil layer and recorded in the wetland data form. The NTCHS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the
United States(Midwest Region)were then applied to determine if hydric soils were present.
• Wetland Hydrology Indicators: At each observation point,primary and secondary indicators of hydrology
were evaluated to determine if wetland hydrology was present.For most sample points,wetland hydrology
was determined on the basis of depth to water table,saturation,drainage patterns,shallow acquitard and
FAC-Neutral Test.
4.0 RESULTS
Two wetlands,one of which extends into the property at two separate locations,were identified on the property. T'he
location of the wetlands and their respective boundaries is shown on wetland features map(Figure 5). A large
wetland complex extends along the north and east boundary of the property. A second wetland is located near the
southeast corner of the property and is associated with a stormwater ponding area and drainageway. The total area
of wetland on Lot S,Block 1,The Marsh at Lafayette,is 0.59 acres(25,806 square feet). T'he total area of wetland on
Tract B,RLS No.1630 is 0.59 acres(25,530 square feet).Wetland sample points and their respective USACE data
forms are denoted as SP-1 through SP-5 and are attached to this report.
Wetland Communities and Dominant Vegetation
The portions of the wetland complex that extends along the north and east boundary of the property includes
shallow marsh(Type 3 and 4)and hardwood swamp(Type 7).T'his wetland complex also includes areas of shrub
swamp along the upland-wetland transition t�at was not mapped due to the narrow width of this wetland
community. T'he wetland community located at the southeast corner of the property is a fresh(wet)meadow(Type
2).Dominant vegetation in the large wetland icomplex includes:red osier dogwood(Cornus alba),pussy willow(Salix
discolor),reed canary grass(Phalaris arundin�cea),hybrid cattail(Typha x glauca)and lake sedge(Carex lacustris).
The dominant vegetation in the small wetland basin at the southeast corner of the property includes:green ash
(Frarinus pennsylvanica),common buckthorn('Rhamnus cathartica),reed canary grass(Phalaris arundinacea)and lake
sedge(Carex lacustris). ,
Other common species identified in the wetla#�d and adjacent uplands are listed on the attached USACE Wetland
Determination Data Forms. Hydrophytic veg�tation indicators are met within each of the wetlands by the
Dominance Test and Prevalence Index.
Hydrology
The wetland hydroperiod varies within the t�nto wetland basins. Hydrology in the large wetland complex along the
north and east boundary of the property is su ported by a high water table and periodic inundation following
precipitation and snowmelt runoff events. H drology within the small wetland basin at the southeast corner is
Freshwater Foundation , Pape 4 Wetland Delineation Reaort
Cross River Consulting, LLC June 3, 2015
supported by periodic inundation or saturation following precipitation or snowmelt runoff events. Primary
hydrology indicators include High Water Table(A2)and Saturation(A3).Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8)
and Water-Stained Leaves(B9).
Secondary hydrology indicators include Drainage Patterns(B10),Geomorphic Position(D2)and FAC-Neutral Test
(D5). T'he identified hydrology indicators meet the criteria for wetland hydrology.
Soils
For the wetland basin along the north and east boundary,observed soil profiles generally match the soil profile for
the Houghton and Muskego soils,with the exception that on the northeast corner of the property,some areas contain
up to two inches of depositional material deposited over the wetland soils by stormwater runoff. Soils in the wetland
basin at the southeast corner are characteristic of cut and fill activities and do not correspond to any specific soil
series profile.The observed hydric soil indicators include Histisol(A11),Depleted Below Dark Surface(Ai 1)and
Depleted Matrix(F3).The observed hydric soil indicators meet the criteria for hydric soil.
Conclusion
A wetland survey was conducted for the Freshwater Foundation property,located in Orono,Minnesota.Two
wetlands were identified,including a large wetland that enters the property at two separate locations along the north
and east boundary of the property. The wetlands were delineated with the boundary determined based on distinct
differences in vegetation,soils,hydrology and topography consisting of the following: 1)transition from
predominantly hydrophytic vegetation within wetland areas to non-hydrophytic vegetation on upland areas; 2)
transition from hydric soils to non-hydric soils;and 3)transition from high water tables,saturated soils,or soils with
indicators of saturation,to upland areas that lack indicators of wetland hydrology;and,4)wetland/upland
boundaries generally corresponded with topographic features on the property.
��
�
Freshwafer Foundation � Paae 5 Wetland Delineation Reqort
Cross River Consulting, LLC June 3, 2015
5.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of the Interiar, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office
of Biological Services. FWS/OBS-79/31. Washington, D.C. 20240.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical
Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Minnesota Climatology Working Group. Wetland Delineation Precipitation Data Retrieval
from a Gridded Database. Minnesota State Climatology Office. DNR Division of Ecological
and Water Resources. St. Paul, Minnesota.
htt�: �climate.wnn.edu/�ridded data/precip/���etland/���etla��d.as�
Reed,P. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. National Wetland
Inventory, U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, St. Petersburg, FL.
USACE. 2009. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Midwest Region, ed.J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-09-19.
Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)-Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2010.
Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and
C.V. Noble (eds.).USDA, NRCS in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for
Hydric Soils.
USDA-NRCS. 1997. Hydrology Tools for Wetland Determination. Engineering Handbook, Part
650. Issued August, 1997.
USDA-NRCS. Soil Conservation Service, Dakota County Minnesota Soil Survey.
Freshwater Foundation Pape 6 Wet/and Delineation Report
Cross River Consu/ting, LLC June 3, 2015
v.
�
4
t
4
L,.a!�i..r�l�
C:IuL�
`�F`. .
�c�n+ dreSlv.00;1 itU 5
.ti r
�^ ..�,.� .....«—..a,.
' �.O�M'. _,
,,..,.,--^ . ._
•G�.a,�;f�.d - �iti . r,,....._..,.. -
. t z��)�� „v f��F-_� _
iyf�`' _
�
�
,n,.•,,Av=' Cry>I�I PI �
.g`
. :`i=y N�
�C 4. �
_ � ��.
— � lyn�A:e
z ,.��
PROJECT LOCATION
,_
ti= �
, �.
..��_
_ ,s,
;r' "�.
c
��:� .% r:•/
Z �
'w` �
. .. � I ( ��1 ,
Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ,TomTom,Intermap,increment P Corp.,
GEBCO, USGS,FAO,NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL,
Ordnance Survey,Esri Japan, METI,Esri China(Hong Kong),swisstopo,
and the GIS User Community
Freshwater Foundation "
Wetland Delineation Report
Figure 1 - Project Location Map
Feet
0 500 1,000 2,000
02014 Cross River Consulting,LLC
���� �� `�/� � ��' �{ :� " *��� ��j' !"�' � M
�Y `�'/'�''/�� r� � x,�vw z�, � �`��"f t" �� o>
�i i I "�' u �"� �,.. -���..�x ��
�`x� ��1' � � � 0
� �,��, i�..� �� .� � g�
�3t ' , �{�•�� � �,�o - .
a L a
ar�� � , ,y��"�e . �.. 932 . a . � .
\\
���� �ar �1\10�V - m . � .. ..
�e*�
� �..�� �w. .
., 1�` ' �. '�'�: .�
o���. ,.9A ,,;_�.,,, �_ .�� � ,� � � z
�i, �r�"`�"w'�,-��� s. �:,.
_ M
� er � 4 � . � � �
� �
�. ._
o _
� ,�.� ��.. � � ,�,,. ��' �,.� �� _
�
. ��
��. �� x
� . �� . � � k. ; ,. ,
� � � �
� r' �� � � ' .
�, �
,/,`. � ,.: `fls,�.t } �`� .934 `�. � 9g2 g32
x��'�` . . � ,��''� � . ..�
�; . 4 � .
� � �
� � � o
G�' 9s �" 9g? � 6 M
'� ,�968 . � � 95q 1,���. �� , �
� , ,
� � �� ��. �
,;. � 958 9
�t � a „-
� ,
, � �„
: - +- �
.�. � � . i ,t� ,,
i� � *� � �� # �
u 11 -:�`r. �,v �c�
9 .,�' . � '_� `:1.. ;� ,� ,� � '
�� .
6`8i ,��'� � ,� °. �r` .' , ��;
� "
�� � . �y � � :�
� %� 966 9 �1 ''iR� N �"� �� �� �
p.. .. � ::�,r
F SS7 � 3� ,. y �
b 't3�A . . `$�'.�.��� . ��w, ^ �yr.�S, -
tk" °�� p ''�, "°� � p�y h.' �"�, k
,� r ,� .` h
Y 9� � t°� '�'� �r �
� .. �` � :,:!k �, _' - �4,� � - � „* 1"'`� �" k�-
�, - � ,, : :
, , , � . �
� �
t � � �-` � �° y ��,.
� ��
�
' F
�..
. a�rc.sk.��,.m� ... �."'��. .` ✓b"k��, �� F�. .� ._ ..� . � �. �- �R;: ....
`i
� �,.'�
,.. O:�F° . —�t y � . ..
91 ° ��' � ,����v.+�;. ``� �p.� , ,,�f : ��. � �", n�r �,
�,.
� � �. �� � �� � � � � '��11"'
� � �" j� �
� f 4 ii � t� ��" �*'�' � '
��..�� � .'� . -:''+—.�' � -' �A� ��� ... . .
� �
.
6 �i � _ �F , � � m� ,� ( �� 'P.� � . � � �"`� �g
��r �.� � d�+�dAw�. �,',,� ���� � .�. �3�yb'� �,�` <� � ��✓:. � ,�t
�
s
�µ , .
� .� ':, #$' ��
� ;..�..a.' �:. � .�-�yq�` �d ��' f:.�. .�� r..��� , � �i+ � - � ,� �a..� ��7�. ���
' ...�� � ��� ¢ �
� �� ,. '�� "�, �� ���. �•����.�� � �� ��: "'x�.�� � � e�� ���
��,�+ �` �$� ':�` �� � ?� �
� �
t
��� � �� .� � �� ����� �,�. .�.
_ � �
,� ,,w s�`` s r�'� - ` !�
�_� �f• , � �:�' �^�,.., ��l�� F '`� ,M�''`
� •,w�96� �y. � � � � �;,
f�� "" � .. ���.�^b �y�+�"
956i��� r�„- �: .1 � �� ��. �'�� �� �;, - . �.
�+ �
.: _
�-� '� -� ;� '�� �..� �� � - a.
948 �E.'"'s,,,.'`` �;.-�` �` a_ �� �,:. =�i . ��..n��#' ��.'.�+.�erd' `
.a�
�; ""36 � �� � �` T ` ,;• �' �� �. ��!" �r
o � `
_, gg ��'"�.� �..'� ��;.�v_ ,� ���� �,r^' -, � -.�?!1�� �,
,i� � �' -� �'e. �q � � , . �`w'
� �
. : , " � . _
930 i�, �; �"�►� �" � : �^��,;, t ��� ..9�
� 94q ` �
" � r r
Freshwater Foundation "
Wetland Delineation Report � Property Boundary
Figure 2 Feet
Aerial Imagery and LiDAR Topography o 50 100 200
02014 Cross River Consulting,LLC
F� � ��� pt � �� �'" +�m �' �, ... � � . ..
,� � �. ��y��f.
° �� �
� <, . , �
- ;:„ ;, , . � €�_ �.� -. ,
�4 r t�. m::.,. R ;�..
,•,i � � .,
i � r
� �I�+' f" . � �.�, �" �5'•;u"
� *� � pt� �� � !r �' �� �� ��r,�� r "�
, .
�,,, � �. ,
t , ,
� � �. �
a
s , '�"'�a'
;
..
�' ' k
.. e ` . �_ • �� ,
� ��� ��.� . . . . r,��. . ..
� " > u
�
'{, . .. ' .,, �'+<r« ..�..
� �� � 5
' .{ Y.... ... ';_,
' �� " tY �'. . .., .
�
E �a . .,' ` ��� . ;: ., .
�'* "^" t,�^'` Z' •I� '�� �� �
� .
��. . I ' � � ,�; � e� � � � .�, �� 4 �,� � a�
� „ � � � �' "r`� � g � , �
� � � �i� �- P a 1� �` ., �`��: � r,
�I � � � ��
, T , �
,t. . . . ' � .. -.. � b
��� • � � ' r. � ` �
�' � � �
� � f � �� � r��.. �
��?,�'i. �,P� � ,� -�
�� Y, � .
� �� '#t ,y � � �`�;
"y�"'�,.� "� y �, �." ...sz . �„.���,�,
�� �
�.y��.. ,� ��" +S� ' � � � � ...
' ' t
„ .
..� .,.4. , , a4�y*a£.�; + �, �:
�,
'��"' �" "r�. x u� �; =��
�' �:#� 1 `�' , � �,� � �- t: -
� ,
.
� � n �,.
- 4 . � . . � ,. ,
«
',,� . �� . :. . ; .� � ..
�Y. � � � ��� �. � �
� � = 4 ��
` _ �,;`� � ��
t � �.
� � � ,�. `� �;� � � "� ,
�•¢ gM .� { � � ��er rs �'� �
� � � !t +d µ a e.
� � � ,
� ` M
h= �
-•, � t .\�.,<' ._.��1. ; y . —. � . � '
, �
�'°�.-� ,�. ..� ,,.. �. , �i.. - . q , ...�� '��
. . ' . ,. S �* � . . � ` ,J6
r s: ,
� , ,
�
. „.
., � . x , . a � . � �� �
�. �•� <
? , s
. ��� �' ��- ' �•
�'�.� ��� � �. b, � � � �.�.� t.'� � _ �� � ��.
w' �� ' � � � ,� ,� ..
� �s ��1�,� �` � �` � �.�.
� , �:. .
� x�� � ,� ,.
�,5� r� t �_
r� r3. W:��' A�� � :, � { � � f�. �, � s� � , ,�v
}� ��� � ��� � * �� �`� '�^ , �� � ,�t
� � .� � � � �,
;�
`' �� � '*� ^� � � �`�.� .x .� "'�
, .
�; - , �. � �T �F � �;;i �� . .
`�:: � -x� r"� �,: � �.. ,. . ���� � 1!� �,
� � ,
.. :� '� � � .. ' "���n� w'�� �. � .s
� ; � ;� ' � .�; ...
.w. �, �
, �.. �_ � - � ,,s
� ' � �.
' , ;;;� �a.,� � � �'�, . ��`�°
� � � � 9�a� �� � � s
Y
. ,
� .. ;
,
. ,
� ��� ' �3A�P'�
i t✓ i, s.�j/,��.w.,.
�� .� '� ; wk k � '��� � � � •a..M�.
�
Ar
„ ., . .
A � � � � � �- ��
� �:. � .- � , S4
_ ' : . �
_ �, ..:.�. , ��... _. , �a.�.. „t� �. ' _..�. _
� r
h , � v
+.e . '' ��R�� �� �
, � � At #,� � � ..
Freshwater Foundation "
Wetland Delineation Report � Property Boundary
Figure 3 Feet
Soil Survey Map Units o 50 100 200
02014 Cross River Consulting,LLC
�r• �t4 �r .� " �..��� 'r" � � _, ' , -.`t ` ar �� ,Y
.
. .
�s � � �r� . �, �t� �.+ r � ,"�` '� f
� ,wr., �. _ ��. '� s X. '�1' '"#K1i.. j��1 L '� i-.1�.:yvf``
,�� .,. , .r4 ` ry
II�� 74G �S 1[�t. � �'�,� �"� I
� n • � .�y � �� '�p'�� * f �� _�`.. � ��T������ �l" y� 47f
K`. a;��"�, � .Y �{ Vt.��� ��vlt# 1«.'�. ♦ ��� ✓ "
M ,
' .
u . ' � �. i ... � � r�� � �a � �,:��e�i /
r � � � �` � ##��
� a w
't, �.�•�� ^ � � •���V��•�P y� ���.•����JI� �� �� �f�..� ' . �`,�
_� . .� : r � ,� A f ..� f„��. , �.,��' �� •�, �Z
����,..'���� ��� � �'x�v � i R �e+�� �*�'' !...f :�.. �Y ..
�� �e` ' ,�. �i ��► �'� f t '`9#�'- . '�5� �r � i ��t'��.
4 • r � '" �„�a�^" ti�
�� • � !f �� .�R4`. �. '� ��� �. �4 A' 'j,Y� 1,'Cr" �' ��;� r t '.a, � �`�°,.�P y �^
' �i � � �� �a , ;� ,�� .� �ICr>;��'i: �!c^ :"� T a„� r 4 � .5
�` �, '�'� r�_''�� P ��� `` ` , r. i� '�a:, 3`' �s �<<j�;
'�� . j6� , '�l.�' �", � ,:�"• ,�I� ,+ �,s�� �p � ..� ,
, �' �� �► r�Rr �� ^ �. 'fC .e��" ,�, � s
1�� �_��' ��1�^��r;� l"^ .J'���A -�qt ,�'�j�, y► t�
�` -� �T`�".• ,.w,.,.AO �r•.<�"`y",� �/!� � '..��^'• •�1�F'� t� ;g,,>�� � �� r �i fi;�.
" . ��.�r�.:( .*. '� ��` tArj ,.�"' ..; . �. 1�� � ,����� k .
� � fi �
� .
r. f , ♦
�
� 1 ��' �q, • ��` , '�G' � q A *;�'.a /Y <�,
,�, p 'a"�,'���i, . � ♦ �, s� "�.��
'�! "j' '' '�'!,"'"'- r ���u "'-
.�
. ,
��" �,�; - - �' � " .� '�
.�. . , � ���,�'sM- '� � �, � �i '`�;�"� '
` .« „. , .
`- �r --,/ , , • «�r��
�, �- .�
� "�_�f -� ,o--' + ,�.` � . . � �
.� s • �._.� �� '� }�y � Nt
�'�+�_ �` �i p �r�
� �^� *��s � •a � j '��,'. !�gy��.�,�� - _• � �� �a
.--�. � � ` ' /— � � �
� _- �w ° �� .F�� �G:*f.� . ., �� � �
�� __. .". � ` � j�� A� -.., ,/y1} �`, �..� � r�� ?�
r �
, } _�'� ��,,.� �,�:. � � - ��T r '� .:
� . �
/ �.' ��'"`� ,,,�,�� ,'f�' k
. ' =� :��� . � ,'�, � `�;; � ° �`�' ` � E��
' `� ,� �-;��,�+ ,. �,���. ��` ,�fy ,�� ,��,� , � � Q �
. , � l- �pt ..
✓� F1�� .1 $J�^�f Y . �i5 y� .. <� '�`r
✓ , /
�� py ���� ���- Y'� �!!�E., ��fs YM1���' '�; � �s �1�'�'�'����, � + � ..
�. •`5���1, b; ,� r�$q �c r: �_ ��►`. � �,S� ��,��i�����: ,�. "�..i.' s,.
� .��, �'` .��- ,�-'.: �4, ••t ., �"� �� � �r'i;�` .'� , _ ��
�' ti'�,'.+" 'r -� -��t ���'• �``Y.,�,'s► �.!�?6�'`,�, + 'r.� ' . "�
, :
- �� �. 1+1 � '� •� �� 4 `� `''�� � �t �1��
� w 4
t � � � �
, � ti , ,a,��+, ;..�' ,., ,�� a .
'4-C �y� •.�� � {�i "* �r.� ��,� • �r'�E.�,�F� �b < 1Y.(�4' ?
� � � r5. � � M ��'� .` �'f�,.r•�i� �.^� � . t `F.
. r
��`�'r ''��1 ��',� :,�v.. ��,,, ;� �,�,,� �a' �, �.•*�,� dt ,�/j .d► t
,:�c, ,"'�:�� _ ,�'`` `� i' � :��,,.� '� -� �:` ���`_�j*j{y��,�: .�►
�r�s ..�,4� �� ,�.i ���� ddC. r �v���� ,, E ���. ✓,.' �f*.� P y�1��j�� �+
� �'"^ .� s- � r �/���. � 1
�' .��,.�!S� r'',�= �� �Ip�',t_ •f�=. ��'�"�, �+',s #'�+i ..�," �`�� �
,
� . �
., .
4 t
, � �
�; d',�,�' ,+!f . ,' � ��. �° µ�� r, �` • ^� �
° �s ,, • . ��,,� '� " '.�,`, ' �M� , �. ,�� j�r�,�
,
.n'i�_-. .��, , " A `t � . .
E
'�: . ,( �
� . ., � '� aY • e;a ' a.�f w � . �'` ��". �� -'�
Q�
, r r • :
3 � »� . < . t �r ' ,,� � Y �� g y, .�. -+-� , '�*,+
� . . j�'� , . .
� � �-� ..+��� «=�j�,��tu'i�:e? �,,��" . � � '�' " ''.:y� 4 . '+� rt�t �} i
�� �€r� '�. s� �,�'..i��-' � .M'� �".. Y ��r � "`�'� '}�- r, ���4,
' - .�" �p �t��± ,� �s�tg:. �� R .��8" y� �a> „eA".+�' ���
. � � � �� j
,> 4 � .r
`�'` ° :�' :�, �� ,; ,� '�i'� ��`� .
. ,,
. ,,. . ,
��� '� c��ri. f��, t � � � �'`�i�•+ �'��� ��� �
, .
, ,.
°. � - . �,
�• » • t : .
, �, � � `"� � fi r °,' �'^� '� �r
,� : . ..
,
�'���"` ., , 4 : �. ,
.
•„ ,�, ��,y '' � �� r��`���`�- � .A, �� ,.#'•4
�� ,/ 'k,jt��'f. .F <ti'� *',�" t��" .��P � ������
,�' � } s"`p�r ��,r� `{� �'�. ��� �'- i�, �+YP �#',�t �
.t;
� y
' s�'"
, - .. � I � _ � " '{ �, . j,
�,� � 2
x , �", ,
i: . �.-�1�"�# j� .r.��� ,rre„�_�..1,i/C�Y •� , � r �` "`.�a" 'a
_ ���� .., �� . � � • �
�"+E r ty� ���'��'Ii!< T $r �... ."�' a.r
(, -e• ,�J"`"-..�' i �`T'-�'rr� � _, � � �#^��'�� � r��. � r ��°i
, :!Y!� 4'.l r ���ry�9i�(� �.,;�V .�rF � _� "I r 4 ��_ S�e �• S�°.�
.7 /yyn
�.�.y ` J .7,t�.: �. t�, �'�.r" � 9� � ,���~� `�� . .I� . � 'r,�a� �. �.. ; ; 'Q .
. ,��yn
...; - � g p �y
�, y�i;
�'Fj ����f� �a7a.�r... .� 4t�7'� _ t 'vQr��°4.�.�y� ,,' #����f,h�'f'�-�C�
i. ' �� � � ��a * � s���� . R f �s� ���
•� � ' ' � .
�� � ��� "� #� .},,• y�� #G j
:
_ ��� . ,,,� ,�• .� . � :,p � .* {t�� ,, .�� �; �.,
,
� � � � ,_� � �
��� - �` �. - .
.�
, ,
, � �. ,.
« - , t
. .,
a � ,,* � �; c F ` � � �'� �,
�
��
Freshwater Foundation N
Wetland Delineation Report � Property Boundary
Figure 4 NWI Wetlands
National Wetland Inventory ��� ""N °NR Pwi��akes> Feet
& MN DNR Public Waters I MN DNR PWI(Wetlands) 0 250 500
02014 Cross River Consulting,LLC
rM,3.� � u.. $,Fa�r �: : �OY`.�.� _ .,�.
. �'� �& �" '.�'�+'} % 7�§C � ait -
. � � ,�IM°4�P �, j5`�
�$ �`� .. bn 3 ��C J"'"� t� Sa, , .�� '�t,y�`a.`�q �.�i
- �� � � � � � � .
� �� ��!�
� �,- � u ,�.`�d�;.
��"-" �� _'Y �,`a*^T � �' � �_ .. _
� k�. ,s,„� �; +� `_ .. �. .
� �� ji- �
�� �, � �� .�r� �,` �' - - ,. �
�
.�� � � � � � . . - +�g .�
.'�. ��' � ��,�, ,�.S %� � �,s�. � " �� ..��. ,�"�.
� � ��� ,� ..�3 �fr� A... �. , . nAR ..{
,R � r � � I `�;� ''� �:.. #t • .
.. � �e �.�� R.. �T , �Y.� ` � a ...'''':?'� � . .. ,
�:�` � �� ��� �� u'uu� ".��' �V�� ����� � � � �p
�.. ��� � � • r$� » � g[� � �2 e.vP'
� E' . �. a� .!� .
. �,
r.
:
� �. , -.. ' __ , �.. . .
� .� .� �� 1A t . , �� ��
A
'�b . ..:. .. ;. .
���� � �,. � � ,�,� � o
'��� ' � ,
.� � 'A�� � w� . .
. � ' �� �3 + '�."���. � �, �.g�f ��� _
��, f7 �'~� .. t .,s�^ � 3 � �'µ.• � ��`
� ` ... '� � , �
� ,:� ...< ... ,
... ,� '�: . _:: .
. t
' � � � �� ' � _1 .�.:
'�� ; ��F" ��y� � ^q � . � � :. }.
f •��, :� .� "� �� �gt � .�R. �� � .::ara�:
. ;.
..
.�. � v "� ,�� 7
. ,. � .�
' �'� ��re :�j � ���m:,,�. �`�.. �:- �
�,
� . y �
>: . � � t �� �
r . ,
�.�; .
. �
� �. � � .�� _.. . ` , � �.
� � �.�; � ,
�.� - ,�
r - , �
t ,,, _ � � � � �
� .� � . . .
�
� � �" �
j��` Y� � � � :� � , � ��
. �, ,.
�� u .,
. _,, : 2
� .5 �� �r � ��� � �
.. , .
� � � �� � � � �
' � ,�., t �'� ` � '� +' � �",
"*` � . � :, '��ac�
;� £ AL.� ,M �'"`' �_ .v.. �6� ,;r�� ,,.��A�.. �
�
` ,� ,�� � t: .
.,. ... _„r� ., �,; T ..�_ : �� � ,,�p�y Q�
t �
. . , �.s�" � . '4�
� '� �y, .�`.., �� ,. \ � .
!° „ }r +s`t �.. �..� ..,,�� _ 1� .. �6�
,
� '�... ' jn,..' � .
74. �t: a` r_y' .M1
� � � � � �
� y� �� :. e. ..
� � ��� �� � � �'��3�, .)
„ , � M
.
_�- _.. �� -� , �t , ;`�" %� �
« _� � � � � � . t�
4�� a� £ � �s � lF ��^ �� � �� � ��
� �: � � ��,.
���" � ��� , *`�.� �� �- ��
� � ^ � LL� ��' j ~w � � ,�� ��
� ..
� s � �
x �
�, � � :,�
k
,.. ,�,
,-" �.� 3� � .. �',,. �� ' "
; . � �
� �; -
�• � �4..�„ ������
z ` � � �, ' ,a �,�; g �w �'
, , :
� � ; .
y . ` t
'i.w �� . ' ,.„M ... T , 1 �- , � . . � ' �;�,
�Property Boundary Wetland Types
Freshwater Foundation wetland Boundary Eggers&Reed/Circular 39
Wetland Sam le Points Fresh(Wet)Meadow(Type 2) N
Wetland Delineation Report P
� Upland Shallow Marsh(Type 3) �
�' Wetland Hardwood Swamp(Type 7)
Figure 5
Wetland Features Feet
o ,o0 2oa
02014 Cross River Consulting,LLC
CE:RTIFICATE OF SURVEY F�R �=
FRESHWATER FOUNDATION ��
�_:
OF TRACT H, R.L.S. N0. 1630 ANU LOT 8, BLOCK 1, 'I'H[: MARSH AT LAFAYEI'TE �--<
HENNE!'IN COUNTX, MINNE:SOTA ` �
:>�
.a o=
� V:�
h � Q;` .
►`�
5 35"37���.. F �yAOQ �O� �%d`<
1 233`'(` `p0 ''7 J 1..
cjU �<] �:��h� [�j:
V ' .. � _ � � � . j �:;
� . <w
,. �: , , i 0,e
.
.- •-��
.:.. F v. � .. � � ��
S 3ro� �j
. . - '�'�• �r,��`'�' ,� - - . ,�' �6•.�s � � _
, . � ..... '� t.� B°.ra , �
! � �=_n -.. ;�r � ... r� �� _ �'',. -S a�y,o1 ; i � f
. , SP�5 , �� ,.•,� ., �� w.. .v r-.» � r .- '
� y;� "°jO. �, a, F' '+0
i �.,, ' ,. iO� N r�-� ��".s � ��33
. . . .4 , + � � _., t� �.
, "`�•. EXISTING '". �. g < � �
• BUILDING , `�, w iTy� ��: '�' � �
� �.. ., /7�U0 f� ��,` _ j. � K... � •
�,,,.,.'� ,.� w . .�I' . . , .i .
� � � r��1y �� �. � , .�
w _ _ .,. `I'R�CT B �`' . ;„ �,� �' ' j ' .'�•~ . .
�: -, ..: �a� �� ;, , {; LO � � �
nJ � ��_�,,, _ _ __ zz i.iea s �.os�c �\V � ,: �y�� T 8 -� ,.
E-4 � n.,� .r�..�f""—" - � \\ �a, �w� � + .>>sc s.0.c P-3 '
, ' ,
� c_ ;h � -- .r� � : i u � S .
a.r. v,�r.. ..q..c�u � . _ . . � e� ,�, ii w� '�., \..�.
m ` �t� ''�. �P-Z�,�' �N .
� "' r, , \ � I 1i �. r..�.� _ �
,:,,
. � . � .
._ 3
�
- i
� �, �. _ __ =:�a• .�a.% i� �� � i , . '"'
� . � _ _ - . . � ..,; sp-it,r,,+ ��/
M �'''
. �. „
., ,. .. � � .
ry i . • ,... ' . ,�' ., +'
- _ .. ._.,. � „ i.-iei�� n=os�v
� , _ ,�' -: .,.r - -_. _
. ...
• 1,.99 c N 50°7?' 7C"" 'A� t�, �_ _. 734.97 - - ` '22" R�2831.79 :
a Rs921.7& C,0- RD- iv0. l9 „.u, � `
,
. SHADYWOOD ROAU i `_ • , `.
__ _ --_ ______ , .
� f
� q����'.
lf.a::NM q4 C% �FFWSC �/�� ,
. M9.� a�.m�,...� J`:c «Si �,�,H.Q„i.a � ...\ �,�`,..
V
... t r.4 � . •
. . . . ..UARy+�'.AiJrE�is .
• .. r n m.�.er �a�nE ,� �
.. � . w.J..:.o�..a^�Y ar• ..-,
� . � ...,��y u�e�,�.m,.. .. .. .. �. ..
. � .�,e.„n��o��x. �e. ,«. ..� �.. ..,.., .. .
�+ra„q���m,.,a.w�.a u�, a u,..,�<a um�.+
,.-.v
WETLAND DETERhA1NATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
ProjecUSite Freshwater Foundation Property City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 11/06/14
ApplicanUOwner: Freshwater Foundation ; State: Minnesota Sampling Point: SP1
Investigator(s): Anthony R. DeMars 5ection,Township, Range: Section 20,Twp. 117N, R.23W
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Hillslo�e Local relief(concave,convex,none): Concave
Slope(%): 3 Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name Udorthents,wet substratum,0 ta 2 percent slopes VW I Classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Y (If no,explain in remarks)
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"normal circumstances"
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology naturally problematic? present? Yes
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (If needed,explain any answers in remarks.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Y
Hydric soil present? Y Is the sampled area within a wetland? Y
Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Y f yes,optional wetland site ID:
Remarks:(Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominan Indicator pominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) °,b Cover t Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 20 Y FACW that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 4 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across ail Strata: 4 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
20 =Total Cover
Saolina/Shrub straturr (Plot size: 15 ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhamnus cathartica 10 Y FAC Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 42 x 1 = 42
3 FACW species 55 x 2= 110
4 FAC species 13 x 3= 39
5 FACU species 0 x 4= 0
10 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5 ) Column totals 110 (A) 191 (B)
1 Carex lacustris 30 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.74
2 Phalaris arundinacea 20 Y FACW
3 Solidago gigantea 15 N FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Lythrum salicaria 10 N OBL Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Rhamnus cathartica 3 N FAC X Dominance test is>50%
6 Ribes triste 2 N OBL X Prevalence index is<_3.0"
� Morphogical adaptations"'(provide
s supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation"
�=Total Cover (explain)
Woodv vine stratum (Plot size: )�-
I 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 y rop ytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate heet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL Sampling Point: SP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redo�x Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc'`* Texture Remarks
0-5 10 YR 3/1 100 Clay Loam
5-9 10 YR 5/1 90 10 YR 6/2 10 D M Clay Loam
9-14 10 YR 5/1 97 10 YR 5/3 2 C M Clay Loam
14-24+ 10 YR 6/1 50 10 YR 5/6 3 C M Clay
10 YR 5/1 47
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol(A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Coast Prairie Redox(A16)(LRR K,L,R)
Histic Epipedon(A2) Sandy Redox(S5) Dark Surface(S7)(LRR K, L)
Black Histic(A3) Stripped Matrix(S6) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K, L,R)
Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Stratified Layers(AS) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Other(explain in remarks)
2 cm Muck(A10) Depleted Matrix(F3)
X Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) Redox Dark Surface(F6)
Thick Dark SurFace(Al2) Depleted Dark Surface(F7) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weitand
Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Redox Depressions(F8) hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3) problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type: Hydric soil present? Y
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primarv Indicators(minimum of one is reauired:check all�hat aaqlv) Secondarv Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Surface Water(A1) Aquatic Fauna(613) Surface Soil Cracks(66)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(614) X Drainage Patterns(610)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(B1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Cra�sh Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(B2) (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(B3) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(65) (C6) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(67) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave SurFace(68) Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(B9) Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water table present? Yes No �X Depth(inches): Indicators of wetland
Saturation present? Yes No �Depth(inches): hydrology present? Y
(includes capillary fringe) �
Describe recorded data(stream gauge, monitoring well,a rial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: ,
�
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
ProjecUSite Freshwater Foundation Property City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 11/06/14
ApplicanUOwner: Freshwater Foundation State: Minnesota Sampling Point: SP2
Investigator(s): Anthony R. DeMars 3ection,Township, Range: Section 20,Twp. 117N, R.23W
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Hillslope Local relief(concave,convex,none): Convex
Slope(°/a): 3 Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name Udorthents,wet substratum,0 to percent siopes VWI Classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typicai for tl�is time of the year? Y (If no,explain in remarks)
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"normal circumstances"
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology naturally problematic? present? Yes
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (If needed,explain any answers in remarks.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Y
Hydric soil present? N Is the sampled area within a wetland? N
Indicators of wetland hydrology present? N f yes,optional wetland site ID:
Remarks:(Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
A�bsolute Dominan Indicator pominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover t Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 30 Y FACW that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 3 (A)
2 Tilia americana 10 Y FACU Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 5 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 60.00% (A/B)
40 =Total Cover
Sa�lina/Shrub straturr (Plot size: 15 ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhamnus cathartica 30 Y FAC Total%Cover of:
2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 N FACW OBL species 18 x 1 = 18
3 FACW species 48 x 2= 96
4 FAC species 42 x 3= 126
5 FACU species 15 x 4= 60
35 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5 ) Column totals 123 (A) 300 (B)
1 Plant addition example 20 Y NI Prevalence Index=B/A= 2.44
2 Leersia oryzoides 18 Y OBL
3 Rhamnus cathartica 12 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation lndicators:
4 Ribes americanum 10 N FACW Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Osmorhiza claytonii 5 N FACU X Dominance test is>50%
6 Solidago gigantea 3 N FACW X Prevalence index is<_3.0*
7 Plant addition example 2 N NI Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
—�—
70 =Total Cover (explain)
Woodv vine stratum (Plot size: ) •Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 � y rop ytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate 'heet)
Plant Addition#1 is Carex pennsylvanica; Pla t Addition#7 is Viola sp.
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL Sampling Point: SP2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed td document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redqx Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' Loc*' Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 3/1 100 Clay Loam
5-10 10YR 4/1 100 Clay Loam
10-16 2.5Y 4/1 100 Clay
16-24+ 2.5Y 3/2 100 Clay
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM =Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. *'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol(A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Coast Prairie Redox(A16)(LRR K,L,R)
Histic Epipedon(A2) Sandy Redox(S5) Dark Surface(S7)(LRR K,L)
Black Histic(A3) Stripped Matrix(S6) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Stratified Layers(A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Other(explain in remarks)
2 cm Muck(A10) Depleted Matrix(F3)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) Redox Dark Surface(F6)
Thick Dark Surface(Al2) Depleted Dark Surface(F7) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand
Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Redox Depressions(F8) hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3) problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type: Hydric soil present? N
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primarv Indicators(minimum of one is reauired:check all ihat a��lv) Secondarv Indicators(minimum of two reauiredl
Surface Water(A1) Aquatic Fauna(613) Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(B10)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Ozidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Cra�sh Burrows(CS)
Sediment Deposits(B2) (C$) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) Pr�sence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(64) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(B5) (C6) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(68) Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(69) OtHer(Explain in Remarks)
Field bservations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water table present? Yes No �X Depth(inches): Indicators of wetland
Saturation present? Yes No ~X Depth(inches): hydrology present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
I
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
ProjecUSite Freshwater Foundation Property City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 11/06/14
ApplicanUOwner: Freshwater Foundation State: Minnesota Sampling Point: SP-3
Investigator(s): Anthony R. DeMars 3ection,Township, Range: Section 20,Twp. 117N, R.23W
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Depression Local relief(concave,convex, none): None
Slope(%): 0 Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name Udorthents,wet substratum, 0 to 2 percent slopes VWI Classification: PEM/PSS
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Y (If no,explain in remarks)
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"normal circumstances"
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology naturally problematic? present? Yes
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (If needed,explain any answers in remarks.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Y
Hydric soil present? Y Is the sampled area within a wetland? Y
Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Y f yes,optional wetland site ID:
Remarks:(Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
absolute Dominan Indicator pominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover t Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 4 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 4 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Saalina/Shrub straturr (Plot size: 15 ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Cornus alba 20 Y FACW Total%Cover of:
2 Salix discolor 10 Y FACW OBL species 40 x 1 = 40
3 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 N FACW FACW species 75 x 2= 150
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 0 x 4= 0
35 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5 ) Column totals 115 (A) 190 (B)
1 Phalaris arundinacea 40 Y FACW Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.65
2 Typha X glauca 30 Y OBL
—�—
3 Lythrum salicaria 10 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is<_3.0`
�—
� Morphogica�adaptations*(provide
$ supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
—�—
80 =Total Cover (explain)
Woodv vine stratum (Plot size: ) *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 ' present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 �— y rop ytic
�=Total Cover �egetation
' present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate heet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL Sampling Point: SP-3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redo�x Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) °/a Type* Loc*" Texture Remarks
0-6 2.5Y3/1 100 Clay High Organic Content
6-14 10YR 4/1 95 10YR 4/4 5 C M Clay High Organic Content
14-30+ 2.5Y/N 100 Clay
*Type:C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol(A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Coast Prairie Redox(A16)(LRR K,L,R)
Histic Epipedon(A2) Sandy Redox(S5) Dark Surface(S7)(LRR K, L)
Black Histic(A3) Stripped Matrix(S6) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K, L,R)
Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Stratified Layers(A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Other(explain in remarks)
2 cm Muck(A10) Depleted Matrix(F3)
X Depieted Below Dark Surface(A11) Redox Dark Surface(F6)
Thick Dark Surface(Al2) Depleted Dark Surface(F7) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand
Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Redox Depressions(F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3) problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type: Hydric soil present? Y
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primarv Indicators(minimum of one is reauired:check all that a�alv) Secondarv Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Surface Water(A1) Aquatic Fauna(B13) Surface Soil Cracks(66)
X High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(B10)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(B1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Cra�sh Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(B2) (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(B3) Presence of Reduced iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(64) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils X Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(B5) (C6) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visibie on Aerial Imagery(B7) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(68) Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(69) Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No �X Depth(inches):
Water table present? Yes X No �Depth(inches): 10 Indicators of wetland
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 2 hydrology present? Y
(includes capillary fringe) �—
Describe recorded data(stream gauge, monitoring well,a rial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
ProjecUSite Freshwater Foundation Property City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 11/06/14
ApplicanUOwner: Freshwater Foundation State: Minnesota Sampling Point: SP4
Investigator(s): Anthony R. DeMars 5ection,Township, Range: Section 20,Twp. 117N, R.23W
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Depression/We�land Edge Local relief(concave,convex, none): Concave
Slope(%): 0 Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name Muskego, Blue Earth, Houghton, ponded,0 to 1 percent slopesVWl Classification: PEM
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for tMis time of the year? Y (If no,explain in remarks)
Are vegetation ,soil X ,or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"normal circumstances"
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology naturally problematic? present? Yes
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (If needed,explain any answers in remarks.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Y
Hydric soil present? Y Is the sampled area within a wetland? Y
Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Y f yes,optional wetland site ID:
Remarks:(Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Deposition of silUfine sand layer on surface of wetland. Source of deposition is stormwater runoff from adjacent
impervious areas
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominan Indicator pominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover t Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 3 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 3 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Saalin4/Shrub straturr (Plot size: 15 ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhamnus cathartica 10 Y FAC Total°/a Cover of:
2 OBL species 70 x 1 = 70
3 FACW species 10 x 2= 20
4 FAC species 10 x 3= 30
5 FACU species 0 x 4= 0
10 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5 ) Column totals 90 (A) 120 (B)
1 Carex lacustris 40 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.33
2 Typha X glauca 25 Y OBL
3 Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Lythrum salicaria 5 N OBL Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is<_3.0"
� Morphogical adaptations'(provide
$ supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
80 =Total Cover (explain)
Woodv vine stratum (Plot size: ) •Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 ' present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 �- y rop ytic
! 0 =Total Cover vegetation
' present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate heet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL Sampling Point: SP4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed ta document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc*` Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 6/1 50 10YR 5/6 5 C M Silty Clay Loam Depositional Material
10YR 5/1 45
2-30+ 2.5/N 100 Mucky Peat
*Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soii Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
X Histisol(A1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Coast Prairie Redox(A16)(LRR K,L,R)
Histic Epipedon(A2) Sandy Redox(S5) Dark Surface(S7)(LRR K, L)
Black Histic(A3) Stripped Matrix(S6) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K, L,R)
Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Stratified Layers(A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Other(explain in remarks)
2 cm Muck(A10) X Depleted Matrix(F3)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) Redox Dark Surface(F6)
Thick Dark Surface(Al2) Deplefied Dark Surface(F7) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand
Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Redox Depressions(F8) hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3) problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type: Hydric soil present? Y
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
The native soil is overlain by 2"of silty depositional material.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primarv Indicators(minimum of one is reauired:check all that applv) Secondarv Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Surface Water(A1) Aquatic Fauna(B13) Surface Soil Cracks(66)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(B14) Drainage Patterns(B10)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(B1) O�idized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Cra�sh Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) (C$) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) Pr�sence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(64) Re�cent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils X Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(65) (C6) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(68) Gauge or Well Data(D9)
X Water-Stained Leaves(B9) OtMer(Explain in Remarks)
Field bservations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water table present? Yes X No �—Depth(inches): 14 Indicators of wetland
Saturation present? Yes X No �Depth(inches): 4 hydrology present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge, monitoring well,a rial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
This area was inundated during early-mid summ r precceding the survey date
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
ProjecUSite Freshwater Foundation Property City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 11/06/14
ApplicanUOwner: Freshwater Foundation State: Minnesota Sampling Point: SP5
Investigator(s): Anthony R. DeMars 3ection,Township, Range: Section 20,Twp. 117N, R.23W
Landform(hillslope,terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief(concave,convex, none): Convex
Slope(%): 15 Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification: Upland
�
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for tl�is time of the year? Y (If no,explain in remarks)
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"normal circumstances"
Are vegetation ,soil ,or hydrolo�y naturally problematic? present? Yes
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? N
Hydric soil present? N Is the sampled area within a wetland? N
Indicators of wetland hydrology present? N f yes,optional wetland site ID:
Remarks:(Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominan Indicator pominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) °k Cover t Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 Acer saccharum 50 Y FACU that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
2 Acer negundo 8 N FAC Total Number of Dominant
3 Ulmus americana 7 N FACW Species Across all Strata: 4 (B)
4 Rhamnus cathartica 5 N FAC Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 50.00% (A/B)
70 =Total Cover
Saalina/Shrub straturr (Plot size: 15 ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhamnus cathartica 30 Y FAC Total%Cover of:
2 Lonicera X bella 20 Y FACU OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
3 Zanthoxylum americanum 10 N FACU FACW species 7 x 2= 14
4 FAC species 48 x 3= 144
5 FACU species 80 x 4= 320
60 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5 ) Column totals 135 (A) 478 (B)
1 Rhamnus cathartica 5 Y FAC Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.54
2
3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Dominance test is>50°/a
6 Prevalence index is<_3.0*
�_ _
� Morphogical adaptations'(provide
�
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
�
5 =Total Cover (explain)
�- —
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) •Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 �— y rop ytic
�=Total Cover vegetation
present? N
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Herb layer likely very sparse due to Acer s. o erstory
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL Sampling Point: SP5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed tq document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redo�C Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type" Loc'* Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/2 100 Loam
3-11 10YR 4/2 100 Clay Loam
11-16 10YR 4/2 60 Clay Loam
10YR 6/3 40 '
*Type:C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol(A1) Sandy�Gleyed Matrix(S4) Coast Prairie Redox(A16)(LRR K, L,R)
Histic Epipedon(A2) Sandyr Redox(S5) Dark Surface(S7)(LRR K,L)
Black Histic(A3) Stripped Matrix(S6) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K, L,R)
Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Stratified Layers(AS) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Other(explain in remarks)
2 cm Muck(A10) Depleted Matrix(F3)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) Redox Dark Surface(F6)
Thick Dark Surface(Al2) Depleted Dark Surface(F7) *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand
Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) Redox Depressions(F8) hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3) problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type: Hydric soil present? N
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primarv Indicators(minimum of one is reauired:check all that applvl Secondarv Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
Surface Water(A1) Aquatic Fauna(B13) Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Piants(614) Drainage Patterns(B10)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Cra�sh Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(B2) (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(B3) Pr�esence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(B4) R�cent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(65) (G6) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(67) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(B8) Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(69) 0lher(Explain in Remarks)
Field bservations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water table present? Yes No �—Depth(inches): Indicators of wetland
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge, monitoring well,a rial photos, previous inspections), if available:
emarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region