The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMN wetland Conservation act notice of decision w � �� '� � Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act Notic� of Decisoon Local Government Unit(LGin Address Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 18202 Minnetonka Blvd Deephaven,MN 55391 1.PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name Project Name Date of Application Spring Hill Golf Club Spring Hill Golf Club Application Number (Tim Johnson) 11/1/11 Wll-31 (completed 12/5/11) �Attach site locator map. T e of Decision: �Wetland Boundary or Type ❑No-Loss ❑Exemption ❑ Sequancing ❑Replacement Plan ❑Banking Plan Technicat Evaluation Panel Findin and Recommendation if an : ❑Approve ❑Approve with conditions ❑Deny Summary(or attach): � 2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNTr DECISION Date of Decision: 2/2/12 �Approved ❑Approved with conditions(include below) ❑Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions(attach additional sheets as necessary): A wetland delineation for a project area at Spring Hill Golf Club was performed by Graham Environmental Services,Inc.(GES)on October 24,2011. The project area is within the parcel located at 1050 Tamarack Drive in Orono(PID#26-118-23-42-0006). The boundary was reviewed in the field on November 1,2011 by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(MCWD)staff,with a representative from GES present. The project area consists of two geographically separate project areas shown in Figure 3 of the delineation report. One wetland was found in each project area(Wetland A within the north project area and Wetland B within the south project area). Wetlands A&B are technically part of the same wetland,which is classified as DNR Protected Water 27-837W,but are delineated as separate wetlands because of the separate project areas. Wetland A was identified as a Type 3 shallow marsh,and Wetland B was identified as a Type 2/Type 3 fresh(wet)meadow/shallow marsh. The boundary of Wetland B was adjusted slightly during the field review to include more wetland. The wetland boundaries as fla ed in the field and described in the delineation re ort dated&received BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 1 of 3 December 5,2011 are approved by the MCWD. This decision is valid for five years. A project on this property may require a permit from the MCWD. For Re lacement Plans usin credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account# Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawa](sq.ft. or nearest.O1 acre) Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: ❑ Financial Assnrance: For project-specific replacement that is not in-advance, a financial assurance specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522,Subp.9(List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑ Deed Recording: For project-specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the B�VSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. ❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland baz►k as specified in the approved replacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been metl LGU Authorized Si ature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified above. ff additional details on the decision e�ust,they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU u on re uest Name Title Catherine Bach District Techniclan Sigaa Date Phone Number and E-mail 2/2/12 (952)641-4504 cbachQ�innehahacreek.org THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE 1VIINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal(30 days)has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal,the applicant may be responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP and specified in this notice of decision. � 3.APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commanced by mailing a petition for appeal, including applicable fee,within thirty(30)calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated; Check one: BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 2 of 3 � Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send ❑Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send petition and$ 0 fee(if applicable)to: petition and$500 filing fee to: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Executive Director 18202 Minnetonka Blvd Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Deephaven,MN 55391 520 Lafayette Road North St.Paul,MN 55155 4.LIST OF ADDRESSEES � SWCD TEP member: Stacey Lijewski—stacey.lijewski@co.hennepin.mn.us � BWSR TEP member:Lynda Peterson—lynda.petersonQstate.mn.us ❑ LGU TEP member(if different than LGU Contact): � DNR TEP member:Jack Gleason—john.gleasonQstate.mn.us � DNR Regional Office(if dit�erent than DNR TEP member):Melissa Doperalsld— Melissa.Doperalski@state.mn.us ❑ WD or WMO(if applicable): � Applicant(notice only)and Landowner(if different): Tim Johnson—tim�cQspringhillgc.com � Members of the public who requested notica(notice only): Graham Environmental Services(Mike Graham)—mgraham@grahamenvironmental.com City of Orono(Christine Mattson)—cmattson(a�ci.orono.mn.us � Corps of Engineers Project Manager(notice only):Melissa Jenny— Melissa.m.jennyQusace.army.mil ❑ B�VSR Wetland Bank Coordinator(wetland bank plan applications only) 5. MAILING INFORMATION ➢For a list of BWSR TEP representatives:www.bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA areas.pdf ➢For a list of DNR TEP representatives:www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/DNR TEP contacts.pdf ➢De artment ofNatural Resources Re 'onal Offices: NW Re�on: NE Region: Central Re 'on: Southern Re '�on,: Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. Div.Ecol.Resources Div.Ecol.Resources Div.Ecol.Resources Div.Ecol.Resources 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. 1201 E.Hwy.2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South NE Grand Rapids,MN 55744 St.Paul,MN 55106 New Ulm,MN 56073 Bemid'i MN 56601 For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see:htt�://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr reaions.pdf ➢For a list of Corps of Project Managers: www.mvp.usace.atm, .y miUre�rulatorv/dafault.asp?naaeid=687 or send to: US Army Corps of Engineers St.Paul District,ATTN: OP-R 180 Fifth St.East, Suite 700 St.Paul,MN 55101-1678 ➢For Wetland Bank Plan applications,also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St.Paul,MN 55155 6.ATTAC�IlVI��N1'S In addition to the site locator map,list any other attachments: BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 3 of 3 v � - � � , � ��^,-- . � r - U - '� l r _. .----•- � -- -- �`'� ��i4�. . Q � .. �':.yt A �_ r,.. �I,I ' . � 1' I. �` �j � _ _�' .� I . • _ -- � �;,, �ot�� _•\� � ' ' ' _' � "-ti,G .�' � �t o_. r , , , , �;�-� I a\�� C�-� _�+ _ -y , ' , �� -..� ,. Q ° ,, g - � . � __ . � :o° �. , � ' f ''�,'-� �.,, � -. •� � �. _..- _.__ � ' . , �/`� n . f�p . ` . � `y "E1r.y i /6 - /� �� . . ..."�.-... — .y!� �- II � •II' ____....�." - .. . - ��,iG03 _ . .. ¢ - '_' � • '`� ° (J \\ �l�}`'� /( :l007 �EEII IC[l ��`'-�^�'� � •� � _ �/LUd �..�•r- .. V �' .��7L1% ' I� � _ �f ',� r y..�y�j � � •�� ,5• .�w _.^ • �"� �67 . �0. �� /�� C `-i C� .�� 's � - �� -�. /��. � ' . � . - \` .i`�� ,�II�� ~ /•a* ��nJ �• � � �� . O O \I`..� o '`ii ( . v ^ ,,.� �^c '` � 1 � .. • r,�-- ��l i �� )�� T � � 1;Y O . .�/�.�'rT'I � r �. ^t I �. � , • O ��_5 �,__"�i! ( � Q � v �� '.� \�--�� ( _/ _ � 'p, �� . .. . , r� I� �.�� , �'�� ,iz � � Approximate , � �;-, �. I�� .t .i�, � • 25 L_=� �'�_�•� � � �e , , -� , __� Site Location � " '=-`- ___ _ _ ' � • �r��nFsg e�y _ . F - - . Hni �, , _ -- -- - n .:. . . , ; , •- i 3• �f,cn � �: ' �/625 I O 'I. �P � �,� i • • � /Oa2 :��- — ._'�`_ , �r O � ., . _•'� . - � h'2 +r^. U T / �MOO'. � �s�' � - � ,e, ,I ,�• �� 1 9B6 —�j, �� • . ��, �: q, �, r ; ' ' �ioo � � , '�' - I'Oao �oo ��i - ` �v Iq � a�1,,. n �� p kgey� ��.- •,: I �� ` • l�i.%��,,�,,r, ---'�. , l �� ' - r�� k. • �� 9ea�: �, i" ,.�� "�'s! ` _ �'� - I :Cf', • / �I�, =< r: i� ,�` i� M='��-1, � � /' � � o / � ,'� � .:�,,,.- � � �d '!'a +` •'" , v.d�"(��' � ," . . � l C •� 1 ! S� I� •� O _ — �'Y-\ \\.-�I/ F'� O •� ��(y�� t�� \\ :'%/ '� 1 V I . i ,� t.•�'�' . ��fw r�, ., •� O� 9so 1� .��T ,/� ..'4r� _ ' ia.la .�� - :�!� �:�o ' � ., - - � ��,�/ ,i .. �o _ _ . ' .♦. -''�� " �:��" ,�.,� . _ � ._._ O '�. . , � � . — at�t k � '� ' � �� ' �I �� _ ��-!O .L al�� ,I �G j.tJ� 'R� ,��- -•. - .�. ` �. � .� �� ,�a _�2�� _, \ �p�` _ ' ._ _-.�� +r � �pO ��} '`"\.. _ r I�I � b � � �- ,. J.,�a `g I�/ :I . . _. .�.y� `�'.., - Q .� � �, %-' �'"` ! � ;' J i __ .f� •r GG y.;f . (. — — —. � �` +,��,�'� ��C e ' � __- �i�, � Ll� ,. �i� • C , ��r:. a ' .f �� - " ``!�� ,� o u� c� � '�� ;. s,�� _ ti! o � z'r �y � , _, . s�" � ,� Lo A J�°` > � 9� � � - � ( :. -� �� r:.. r��V ,,, ;�i' �� / ,� � , ti' .�� 1, , o' �010a. �4 � ., �, � �. \ t i�.� � ! .�" l� • '' .l,� � c v ... �o. ��v � � `_��• ' \ `�...,';-_:,�--`-� �'`--�_---" . � � yp�i E��. � ' ,`/- rt Rrr7 _-+��-- _..�r �:_AA � >�t i a :;��'- ,te�l�lt 1 . �� ""-4 �1F; • w. � A N Not to Scale Figure 2. U.S.G.S. � \ Excelsior Quadrangle � Spring Hill Golf Club EOrono, Minnesota S � GES Pro�ect No. 2011.036 Graham Environmental Services, Inc. City of Orono Spring Hill Golf Club Wetland Fill Proposal: A—Wetlands are protected by state law.The purpose of the law is to protect wetlands and to the extent possible prevent any further loss of wetlands in the state. Any proposed work in wetlands requires a wetland application. B—A joint application can be completed and submitted to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). C—This application must include identification of the project purpose, a detailed description of the project and alternatives considered (at least 2 alternatives must be considered in order to meet sequencing requirements). The application cannot be approved unless the proposed activity complies with the order of sequencing as follows: 1. Does the project avoid direct or indirect impacts to wetland 2. Does the project minimize impacts 3. Does the project rectify impacts 4. Does the project reduce or eliminate impacts over time 5. Replace unavoidable impacts. D—The owner must demonstrate why impacts are unavoidable and how unavoidable impacts are being minimized.These reasons have to be approved by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP)which includes MCWD, Board of Soil and Water Resources(BWSR), Department of Natural Resources(DNR) and the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). E—If the reasons for impact are accepted,then replacement must be made. MWCD requires that this replacement be made on site or within the same sub-watershed if at all possible. Replacement required can be as low as 2:1 (replacement:impact) but as high as 5:1 replacement can be required. F—Both the impacted wetland and the replacement area require establishment of buffer.This wetland would probably require a 30 foot buffer.The buffer area has to be marked with signs every 100 feet.The buffer area and wetland must be protected from future impacts by filing a Deed Restrictions and Covenant with the County Recorder or a similar document with the MCWD. This is a summary of the application process. Approval can take up to 60 days from receipt of a complete application. 725 S�� Rve 1J Christine Mattson From: Catherine Bach [cbach@minnehahacreek.org] Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 5:24 PM To: 'Stacey.Lijewski@co.hennepin.mn.us'; 'Peterson, Lynda (BWSR)'; 'Doperalski, Melissa (DNR)'; 'Jenny, Melissa M MVP'; 'john.gleason@dnr.state.mn.us'; Christine Mattson; 'Tim Johnson'; Mike Graham Cc: Steve Christopher Subject: WCA Sequencing Notice of Decision - Spring Hill Golf Club, Orono Attachments: W12-04_Sequencing NOD.pdf Good afternoon, Please find attached a Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision for a sequencing application that was submitted in preparation for a proposed project at Spring Hill Golf Club in Orono. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thanks, Catherine Bach District Technician Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 18202 Minnetonka Boulevard Deephaven, MN 55391 Direct: (952) 641-4504 Main Office: (952)471-0590 Fax: 952-471-0682 www.minnehahacreek.org _� �i�aN��a c��x wwTERSMED a15TRiCT ; Think Green- please do not print this email unless necessary 1 r • t t , Minnesota Wetland Consenration Act No�ce of Decision Local Government Unit(I,Gi� Address Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 18202 Minnetonka Blvd Deephaven,MN 55391 1.PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Name . Project Name Date of Application Spring Hill Golf Club Spring Hill Golf Clnb Application Number Improvements 3/30/12 W12-04 �Attach site locator map. e of Decision: ❑Wetland Boundary or Type ❑No-Loss ❑Exemption � Sequencing ��Yieplacement Plan ❑Banking Plan ' Technical Evaluation Panel Findin and Recommendation if an : �Approve ❑Approve with conditions ❑Deny Summary(or attach): See attached Technical Evaluation Panel Finding of Fact. 2.LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNTI'DECISION Date of Decision: 6/21/12 �Approved ❑Approved with conditions(include below) ❑Denied LGU Findings and Conclusions(attach additional sheets as necessary): A sequencing application was submitted on March 30,2012 in preparation for proposed project at Spring Fiill Golf Club in Orono(specifically the parcel�located at 1050 Tamarack Drive). On May 25,2012,the applicant requested a 30-day deadline extension in order to allow time for the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP)to meet with the City of Orono and the applicanYs consultant to discuss the proposed project. A TEP meeting was held on June 4,2012 to discuss the application,and it was determined that the application as originally submitted would not be approved and additional information was requested. An addendum to the original application was submitted on June 20,2012,and the TEP met on June 21,2012 to review the addendum. At the meeting,the TEP determined that the original application and addendum adequately met sequencing flelcibility requirements and the application is approved. See attached TEP Finding of Fact. The addendum received on June 20,2012 is also attached. This decision is valid for three years. For Re lacemant Plans usin credits from the State Wetland Bank: Bank Account# Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for Withdrawal(sq.ft.or nearest.O1 acre) BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 1 of 3 r Y� � Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following: ❑ Flnancial Asaarance: For project-specific replacement that is not in-advance,�a financial assurance spe,cified by the LGU must be submitt� to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522,Subp.9(List amount and type in LGU Findings). ❑ Deed Recording: For project-specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that tt►e BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" forms have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located. � ❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank crodits, confirmation that BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved roplacement plan. Wetlands may not be impacted until aU applicable conditions have been met! LGU Authorized Si ature: Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipieuts in accordanca with 8420.0255, � Subp. 5 providos notice that a decision`was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as �specified above. If additional details on the d�ision exist,they have been provided to the landowner and are available from the LGU u on uest. � Name Title Catherl�ne Bach Diatrict TecLnician Signa Date Phone Number and E-mail , 6/�1/12 (952)641-4504 cbach�minnehahacreek.org THIS DECISION ONLY APPLIES TO THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT. Additional approvals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with all appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands. Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period for appeal(30 days)has eacpired.If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal,the applicant may be responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts. This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the . TEP and specified in this notice of decision. � 3.APPEAL OF THIS DECISION Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this docision can only be commenced by mailing a petition for appeal, including applicable fee,within thirty(30)calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice to the following as indicated: Check one: � � Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send ❑Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send petition and$0 fee(if applicable)to: petition and$500 filing feo to: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Executive Director 18202 Minnetonka Blvd Minnesota Board of Wator and Soil Resources Deephaven,MN 55391 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul,MN 55155 4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 2 of 3 I � � � � SWCD TEP member: Stacey L�jewski � BWSR TEP member:Lynda Peterson ❑ LGU TEP member(if different than LGU Contact): . � DNR TEP member:Jack Gleason � DNR Regional Office(if different than DNR TEP member):Melissa Doperalsla ❑ WD or WMO(if applicable): � Applicant(notice only)and Landowner(if different):Tim Johnson � Members of the public who requested notice(notice only): Consultant: Graham Environmental Services,Inc(Mike Graham) City: ChrisHne Mattson � Corps of Engineers Project Manager(notice only):Melissa Jenny ❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator(wedand bank plan applications only) 5.MAILING INFORMATION ➢For a list of BWSR TEP representatives:www:bwsr.state.mn.us/aboutbwsr/workareas/WCA areas.pdf ➢For a list of DNR TEP representatives:www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/DNR TEP contacts.pdf ➢De artment of Natural Resources Re ional Offices: NW Re¢ion: NE Region: Central Re i�on: Southern Re►'on: Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. Rog.Env.Assess.Ecol. Reg.Env..Assess.Ecol. Reg.Env.Assess.Ecol. Div.Ecol.Resources Div.Ecol.Resources Div.Ecol.Resources Div.Ecol.Resources - 2115 Birchmont Beach Rd. 1201 E.Hwy.2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South NE Crrand Rapids,MN 55744 S�Paul,MN 55106 New Ulm,MN 56073 Bemid'i,MN 56601 For a map of DNR Administrative Regions,see:http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr roaions.pdf ➢For a list of Corps of Project Managers:www.mvp.usace.armv.miUre�ulatory/default.asn?p�geid=687 or send to: US Army Corps of Enginears ' St.Paul District,ATTN:OP-R 180 Fifth St.East, Suite 700 St.Paul,MN 55101-1678 ➢For Wetland Bank Plan applications,also send a copy of the application to: Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources Wetland Bank Coordinator 520 Lafayette Road North St.Paul,MN 55155 6.ATTACHMENTS In addition to the site locator map,list any other attachments: �TEP Finding of Fact � Addendura to original applicntion received June 20,2012 BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 3 of 3 1� � SPUr� Medina ---:.._. �,�. � Green Deer Hil�Rd Oal�Park �,� z Approximate "�'t�°r �'�- J m Site Location � �' �' a � � Z � o � m � � � � 6 S � I� �'_ 6th Avg N� Orona Ptymouth m -- _ �� -._- �a ' ��—_ � � -��—- w �i c�a ' —:: ,,_� -� W �{.. �� . _ Z � � .n:� ��. � - � �ior�rd Ra � x sT m c �t°� z� � ,, � �� ,�, L.On3� `� ,r� �� ' ' e Det118(g�, � ��y�_ ��`�,,. �'i(y� �`` q') �\ Z � .:.-..,_.. '� �' Loeg �_..,�. ,_—r�u��B�. Ohi� � 116 ��""�,, 12.` \1 m �.�,,.,�,,. :_ �\ �,fe � Co "'�h��3and P'1988-2006 Microeoft Co oretion and/or ite euY�lfers.All ri hts reserved\ Ra � A N Not to Scale Figure 1 . Site Location Map � \ � � Spring Hill Golf Club r,-+ Orono, Minnesota S � GES Pro�ect No. 2012.001 Graham Environmental Services, Inc. � • � �. l � � � � � � � � � � � Date:6-22-12 LGU:Minneheha Crcek WD County:Henne�i�/Carver LGU Contect:Catherine Bach Project Namo/#: vV 12-Q4 Phone#:952-641-4504 Location of Project: I�v _ �SE 26 118N 23 W � %, '/+ %. Sec. 'I`uvp. Ranga LotBlock City: no County:Hennopin TEP Members(and others)who reviewed project:(Check if vtewed proj�ct site) �LGU:Catharine Bach �BWSR:Lvnda Peterson ❑SWCD:StaceX Lijewsla ❑DNR(if applicabk): Other Wetland Experts present:Jesse Struve.Citv of Orono , TEP requested by:Catherine Bach 1. Type of TEP determination requested(check those that apply): Exemption(WCA Exemption#_� NaLoss Wetland Boundary and Type Replacement Plan X Sequencing 2. Description of Wetland{s)with proposed impact: a.Wetland Type(Circular 39),�(Cowardin)PEMC Wetland Plant Community Type'Shallow Marsh b.Wetland Size 6.52 ac c.Size of Proposed Impact(acres and square feet)To be determined 3. � Have uencing re uirements been met? Attach Sequencing Finding of Fact as supporting information. � �Yes �No(if no,list why): 4. Ts the project consistent with the intent of the comprehensive local water plan and/or the watershed district plan,the metropolitan surface water maYa ement lan and metropolitan goundwater managament plan,and local comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance? [�Yes �]No(if no,list why): 5. What is the net result of the project on the following wetland functions: F�tnerions e de N�e � �rnove � Floodwater Storage Nutriant Assimilation � Sediment Entrapment � Groundwater Recharge Low Flow Augmentation Aesthetics/Recreation Shoreland Anchoring Wildlife Habitat Fisheries Habitat � Rare P1andAnimal Habitat Commercial Uses 6. For replacement plan or naloss determinations,are wetland funcdons maintained at an eqtu�l or greater level?� ❑Yes ❑No(if no,list why) 7_ Doas Technicel Evaluation Panel recommend a roval of the activity proposed in item 1? �Yes ❑Yas,with Conditions �No(if no,list why): 8. List TEP findings to support recommendation in quostion 7 above.(Please attach documeentt if necessary).The applicant has minimized the proposed impacts by reducing the impacts originally proposed to both the north and south impact areas. The applicant has also submitted functional assessments using the MnRAM for the proposed impact sites as well as the proposed replacement sites. The replacement sites had higher quality values dt functions than the proposed impact sites. 9. ,�NATIJRES((J'TEP recom�nendallon is no!a consensus, ole tiv�l an as�rlsk nd lafn on lhe back of thfaPQBe) � . W�!' lJ�� Sw ) B xepr�aativo te) � L(3 tative ) DNR Repnseotative N�te) Page 1 of 1 • Spring Hill Sequeacing TEP FOF (August 200� , L 1 , � Graham Environmental Services, Inc. S1095 Westland Drive � � Spring Valley, WI 54767 Phone: 715-778-5730/888-279-2070 ��' Fax: 715-778-5867/888-279-2069 Memorandum TO: Catherine Bach FROM: Mike Graham�-� � DATE: June 20, 2012 SUBJECT: Spring Hill Golf Club Sequencing Application Catherine, Since our meeting of June 4, 2012 with yourself and other members of the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), we have completed additional information for the TEP's consideration of sequencing flexibility(Minn. Rules 8420.0520 Subp. 7a) for the wetland impacts proposed as part of improvements to the 13�' hole at Spring Hill Golf Club. Specifically, we have completed MnRAM analyses for the entire wetland complex on the site (referenced as Wetland 15 in old permit documents), the proposed north impact site, the proposed south impact site, and the proposed on-site mitigation wetland. The consultant for the wetland bank proposed to be used for the remaining mitigation requirement has completed a MnRAM analysis for the wetland bank. Based upon the MCWD's policy of desiring wetland mitigation within the watershed district, Spring Hill has proposed to provide what mitigation it can on the site which would be adjacent to the proposed south wetland fill area. Space within the golf course is limited and, as this would be a wetland "creation", only up to seventy-five percent of the new wetland area on the site would be eligible for wetland credit and the required finrenty-five foot average upland buffer(per WCA) would likely qualify for up to twenty- five percent credit. For these reasons, Spring Hill proposes to purchase approximately one-half of the required mitigation credit from a wetland bank (see below). Revised Wetland Imqact Since our June 4 meeting, Spring Hill has modified its plans which would reduce the amount of proposed wetland impact in both the north and south fill areas. In the north fill area, the proposed earthen bridge has been deleted from the plan and the existing span bridge will be reconstructed or replaced to address the maintenance and safety issues discussed in GES, Inc.'s March 30, 2012 Sequencing Application document. Based on preliminary grading plans, the north wetland fill area would cover 15,568 square feet (0.36 acres) as opposed to the 20,600 square feet (0.47 acres) originally proposed. . . . 1l� 'n Spring Hili Golf Club Sequencing Application Addendum June 20, 2012 Page 2 of 3 The south fill area has been reduced nearly in half from 10,200 square feet(0.23 acres) to 5,400 square feet(0.12 acres). The total wetland fill proposed per the revised plans is 0.48 acres compared to the 0.707 acres originally proposed. A pr+eliminary grading sketch is shown in Figure 1. In Figure 1, the green shaded areas represerrt where erosion control fabric would be placed on the sideslopes. The flll areas are those areas within the heavy dashed black lines and the heavy red lines. Sequencing Flexibilitv For this project, the question of sequencing flexibility comes down to two basfc questions: 1) Is the quality of the wetlands proposed for impact demonstrably degraded such that m�igation would result in a certain galn in wetland function and value and 2) Do the mitigation wetlands provide a certain gain in wetland function and value. We believe that the proposed we�and impact areas are obviously degraded based on their vegetative composifion and that the MnRAM analysis bears this out. We further believe that the mi�ga�on wetlands provide clearly higher functions and values and therefore that flexibility in the sequencing steps is warranted in this case. Please see the discussion below under"MnRAM Anayses". On-Site Mitis�ation The attached Figure 2 shows the approximate area and corifiguration of the proposed on-site wetland mitigation area. (Please ignore the original wetland flll area note and hatching). The design of the on-site mitigation wetland would be wet meadow(Type 2) to avoid having � infested w�h invasive cattails. Although designing for Type 2 will provide ideal habitat for reed canary grass, a management plan would be developed and followed to control reed canary grass and other invasives (see add�ional information under"MnRAM Analyses" below). The exact footprint of wetland and required upland buffer in this area would be developed at a later date but we believe that approximately 20,000 square feet of viretland (15.000 square feet at 75%)and approximately 7,500 square feet of upland buffer(1,875 square feet at 25) could be developed on-site in this location. This would provide approximately 0.39 acres of the required 0.96 acres(0.48 x 2) of mitigation cnedit. The mitigation bank wouid be used for the balance of 0.57 acres. Off-Site Mitis�ation The "Heritage Woods" wetland bank(#1410)would be used to provide the balance of 0.57 acres of mitigation credit not provided on-site. This bank has Type 1, 2 and 4 wetland credit,s as well as upland buffer. it is located in the North Fork Crow River Major Watershed. Spring Hill has had discussions with this bank owner and couid enter into a purchase agreement to acquire the credits at any time. Other Wetland Banks Considered Per the TEP's recommendation at the June 4 meeting, Spring Hill has talked with the City of Wa�2ata's wetland bank corrtact person. As of the date of this memorandum, it is not known whether the City is intending to make their credits available for public sale , , ti 1 Spring Hili Golf Club Sequencing Application Addendum June 20, 2012 Page 3 of 3 or not. Spring Hill was told that the bank has deposited 15 percent of their credits into the state bank thus far. Other banks within the same Major Watershed (20) as the impact site and/or within Hennepin County were also considered. A total of 14 banks met one, the other or both of these criteria. Of those 14, two do not have enough credit, three are not for sale to the public or the ovmer could not be reached, two are not Corps-approved (it is not known whether the Corps has jurisdiction on the Spring Hill project as of this date), one is selling for$2.50 per square foot (considered to be outrageously priced), one has just upland credits (assumed to be a problem for the Corps). This lea�res four banks that are possibili�es f�or the Spring Hill Golf Club (Banks#1310, 1346, 1410, and 1414). The only one of these banks in the same Major Watersh� as the project site is#1346 but it only has Type 5 wetland credits available. Although credits deposited in the state wetland bank have been converted to "Standard Wetland Credits" (SWC), the preference would be to replace the Type 2/3 wetland impacts with Type 2 wetlands if possible. This narnows the banks to #1310 and 1410 (Heritage Woods). MnRAM Analyses Please see the attached MnRAM summaries which indicate that the overall wetland basin as well as the north and south impact areas generally score "Moderate"for almost every category. The MnRAM for the on-site mitigation area generally scores moderate to high, primarily because it would have a managed upland buffer with an average width of 25 feet, would be protected by a permanent conservation easement and would be managed to score "High" as a Type 2 fresh meadow for vegetative diversity/integrity. When completing the MnRAM for this basin, obviously some projection is involved since it is not yet constructed. Assumptions that were made include: 1)the wetland would be constructed/maintained as a Type 2 wetland, 2) active management would be done per a Vegetation Management Plan to maintain the wetland as a "High Qualit�'fresh meadow, 3) BWSR Mix 34-271 or similar would be used for the wetland, 4) BWSR Mix 35-641 or similar would be used for the upland buffer, 5)the condition of the mitigation wetland was assumed to be assessed one growing season after the first full growing season, 6) Lester topsoils in the area of the mitigation site wouid be stockpiled and used as topdressing — hydric soils from wetland impact areas would not be used because of reed canary grass and cattail problems. Piease consider the aforementioned and attached ir�formation as an addendum to our March 30, 2012 Sequencing Application. cc: Tim Johnson, Spring Hill Golf Club Kurt Quaintance, James R. Hill, Inc. � aan6i� - .__ 'f�� •��t t -_.. .. . .- 4 .. ._ ,. l � ' - f�r��. -. __� . . - �• Y."l:� :.•i�� _ "� __ � �� _ r ' _ � � � . �� - r . u.. , _ ` ` I . . �;' _ • " •• • .- ' .i .' �:�. '�;` ' A. . _ -! ^ . . . ! .' . `� 1 't• �- � 1 ` I. `" ' . . . �. \ _.._ . . ' ..1. ^ i. - . . . . �/ � _ �• � . . �. i- ± � - .. � ., � � - % . .. . ._ I ' _ _v 'f.� . �. 1`� 'f.' i. .__ ` .. __.. `. ..' \ . _ II' �, � , ( �4''�,•� . .. S•- . '•� \ .. 1' .. � . ^/• . _ ^ . _ ' _ M 1S( �, , . .��! ' ' , �� r n �J ` h�,y��y `, �;` `�•�Q �,�'� �>� _ � . _ � '. � •� � , , � r� � . J � \ � ^ � � _ ,� ��E�� , �' /� �--- f,��, :.,. '='��.�, r , ��"� , �,\ . � � i , �;« � . �_' I � � '✓ ' '` .. f._ \� 1 ,C gl,�� '�y ' �� .s�l 1 �.. �� . k:`� �� _� ��I • y.+.!a�....«,� � � �� s�� "��+ - �_i-_ i�i� '}�..;� 1 ;.t 1 `:� � � \ '�.,... — 'S3+._' �. � . ,,-"rt:��, ` —,„\ � . � �'� �� /�� ,'j� �"�" -`�. �, -v . . ' I ' � ,CL . � :I t:h\ ;,a`��;�' ,,,��rj 4 r�� ' \\� _ ' ` \ \� ' m� �r� � �Y 4Y r•. �'�. .. �� '�r�°��,Q�� ' '��- , , ', ''`� , �� . ; ,.�`,, � .,�1.. .� , � '�, ��^J '�,`, �V�/ � � '_- • � i:J'.'.i ` /y4i�`,i,�,Y;_ �/ ` �� . • . r- � I oj• - � � � � ��g�(� � �� s' , , _.�. ' *�i I ` �I/•a ,'� 1 /. ` ' . .- �/�. � '�� / .. � �1�'L. 1� L: � I // ., .t ; , -•� � � � ` '�� . � �i � � � � ( , i � I � � ` �' f� �► ._ - �} \ :� , � �'. � y " -;, � . ".I.. y• ~^ . t' r �"� � .., �, . `�_ �sy +,`,�. � � �! �'x %i �� J / I ._. .� � � � ir �,_. �� . . - /, �j �, 1�� ..� � J - ' . y t t ' i � � � �{. ..^ ~ -- —. _ ,�'�°t✓,�i` .., �1.��`�d �.. `~� a,� `� —.� "i�m_�_- —n u ��y - , �' . �\ -�-- _� ��{T\ .�.�yn +� �t�'�6�1 Z 1 `� - (� _ -- J �� y...�-� ` �� .. . . � j y�� "' �j{�1� ��. ' , '�.Y� �,/1 �;�d�� ' I i Y �'��i-,�e 7�y1' i �� I ,� _ J __ - i i � ` � 'A / ��'` i f j � �� —- , I � 1 7 , A l�,� 1�'L � . � . � :i (A> �U ?t � � � ��- , 1 . � __' �i / � .��n�. I t � � � - . �� .. __ .� � �� 1 c.7 �� 1 V��,J.h � � r� � .'�. _ � t a�Jl) , � � � � n � S � /''� i ' ,.. -- .'� •�. ?L� "— `• 1� '� � � � � � 'J<;t1.�i ` � � � �!� � 1 �� r f .r -a- 1 � '+ - � ` \ � t ': , . �� x C1-;-, �; � !� : ��, �` �� , � � j � � �' `� � � � � ,� � O r{� �� ,: . � 't \ � i1 � .\ -�\ � � , 'ii . _ . , � �: ' � ; , � '�� , , , , i _ l . � � � .._..c �� , �, , �.. � �`-.�� . / .._ � �. .i . ,{' � j'� �� . .. _ . . ' � �, � � -_. � - \ � , _. , ; DELINEATED ��—=_ .�, , . � ._. ' , ,�. � , z � WETLAND _ � � , — — , � � , r� �� .�, , ''` � s:ar��arar w � _, � N ,.1 . ,,, ( , , �. . . �+. �. �. :. . .- if �{1'j�(' (� t � � i r r . � � - �- . � , a77 �' y�' -_ ��s+ s+ _ a � `1 - . , .__� x:� 1 r -' � i � rs _ �r ' '- -,_ __ � , � � . - � , . _ . ._ - \ � a� ��a . � � _� �. � � r �, _ �' � !. t � �e � � `� '� � - — � � ��'� , -, . _ I ; r °;. ; � � ' � _ ,- �, \� �,`` b i. ,�� a� �� - � .. � • ►� � _ l � � , \ i i _ . . ' . .._. '. \ �. '—' - � � r r . .. �: � , � F .. .. � : Y � , I • � � � . � � ,. +`�`• � ` . !, F � a ', � : ,-' �' �^ � `\ � �'_,{ -�,. , � � � �`� t \ �� y � ti �� t�'�` "'ci�'`t2 , �,,, ` � . _- � ��•s� '� SCALE IN FEET - , �. ., � _ ., - . , ., . , , ``,' `,� � �� , � ; � ,, � ��\, l _ w 0 100 , . . . c ��1 � '` � ! � � �� 1 y F�i�1 ti � � � �1 - .s_ � , � , t ' . � ; , '_ t_ ' � , 1 inch = 100 feet ;< ?�.�,i ` _ • �'i ��O , � x �` � � ' ' _ . . : � _ , . �? � , � . , i i ,� \ ` � �: , -.- .. ;t -�� ' � � i ' � . , � ��v� � ' �� -•�� ,n .LT `� � � a:i�,: ', ,� _ _ -- ..._ i , . � l t� ,4 .. . ' ! � 1 .�,��/ , ��- ` _ � �-�\". , � . , / . I (l��J� � - ...._ . _�� - � � � �,:} i �' �j'/// � _ � , l� V 7}�1 '_ " J: �Q� . k, I 1 I � 4 �� ' . ��,-� - �� ' � ' . �u'' . �..v � �:�-` i/�i t �� '�:<�.� �� 7�� ! �1 _. �r�j, �� . � � � . , � � �, ,: ;- ! ' �. � . `.. � ��, ' ' . . � .. ' - , , r � � C�, - t -� . . A _ � �� . �� :� ' f ; , � � , �+'� i ` � , , � l i � ) ) �� ., . .,__.. t � + � `�l i ��v t i� ` � . \ , - _ _ " i . ,.r' J , , �c3 _ � , ,... �y..� _ _ , . , , �< - . , - ' �� - _. , ._. . _. .. -. _ _.=. � . . �n � - .. ' ' � :L._t ( �yc� r� � - � , �; �� i �_ ` .� _�` � � i;_.. - { ,� � x� './ � ,. - � 1 �u. �E � �-� � '._ _. � � ��t Figure 2 ; , , ; � . � ; - �. , : ,. _ � � � , � , , . ,. _ � � „ � ix _ - � � , � MnRAM: Site Response Record For Wetland:Onsite Wetland (whole bas Location: 27-118-23-26-001 Onsite Wetland (whole basin) Plant Community: Shallow Marsh ,f� Commercial crop--hydro impacr NA Adjacent area slope Cowardin ClassificaUon: Circular 39: 26_A Genrle 100�0 PEM1Cd Type 3 o Groundwate►�specific questions 26-8 Moderate 0 k Piant Communfty: Fresh(Wet)Meadow Stee 0°�6 58 Wetland soils Discharge Cowardin Classiflcatlon: Circular 39: 26-C p - - S9 Subwatershed land use Discharge PEMBd Type 2 60 Wetland size/soil group Recharge Q Lisled,rare,specia[species? No 27 pvwnstreamsens./WQprotect A 61 Wet[and hydroperiod ReCharge 62 InledOutlet conftguratlon Discharge S Rare community or habita�? Na 28 Nutrient loading B 63 Upland lopo relief DisCherge 6 Pre-European-settlemertt condiiion? No Hydrogeoniorphology/toQography: 29 Shorelinew�etland? No Additionalinformation � DepressionallTributary Shoreline Wetland 6¢ Restoration porentia! No 30 Rooted veg.,%cover 0% 6S LO affected by res�orotion $_j Maximum wnter depth 24 inches 8_2 %inundoted 70% 3j Wetland in-wa�er width OI feet � , 32 Emerg. veg.erosiort resitlance C 66 �rsting size 8 /mmedia�e draina e local WS 20 acres � 9 g 33 Erosion potential ojsite � Restomble sfze � 10 Eslmaled size%xisting site: (see#66) Potentia!new wedartd �l 34 Upslope veg./bank protection � I/-Upland Soil L22C2-Lester loam 3S Rare wild[ife? No 67 Avemge width of pot.bujfer 0 feet !!-We�/and Sor/ L24A-Glencoe loam 36 �Qre/Rare/Sl/S2 community No 68 Ease ojpotentia!res�ora�ion 3� Vegetative cover � 69 Hydrologic alterations 0 38 Yeg.community interspersion C 70 Po�en�ial wetland rype 0 39 Wetland detritus ( g 71 Stormwatersensitiviry B � 71 Additiona!treatment needs B 12 OutletjorJTood control � ¢Q /nterspersion on[andscape C 13 Outlet for hydro regime � 41 Wildlije barriers �� B WaterShed Mississippi(Metro) 14 Dominanl upland land use B I WS# 20 ServiCe Aree: 7 IS We�land soil condieion B I Antphibian-breeding potentia! For funcxional ratings, please run the 1( Vegelation(%cover) 90°/u 42 H1"�roperiod adequacy Adequate �mma tab re -' Fish resence A ry �� j� Emerg.vegJ7ood resis[ance � 43 p �J� This report printed on: 6/ZW2012 j$ Sediment delivery B I 44 Overwintering habitat � 19 Upland soils(soil group) B ¢S Wildlije species(l'ut) Slormwater runo C 20 .l.j`� 46 Fish habi�a[quality C 2 j Subwatershed we[lond density B 47 Fish species Qist) 22 Channels/sheetJlow A I 48 Unique/rare opportuniry No ; 23 Adjacenl bufJ`'er width 15 feet� 49 Weiland visibi/ity C l Adjacent area management SQ Pro.rimiry�o population No � 24 A Fu!/ 30% S j Public ownership B 1 24-B Mnnicured 70%j S2 Public access _C] 24-C Bare 0% i ,S3 Numan inJluence on wetlnnd B� Adjacent area diversity/s/ructure S4 fluman inJJuence on viewshed � 25-A Na�ive 20%oJ SS Spa�ialbuJJ'er C 2S-B M�re� 80% .S6 Recrealional acliviry polen[ial C I 2S-C Sparse 0%� - Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Maln�tnance n�at,u�� oJ Ftood/ Downshrau� oj wuland Wedand Name H ro somo ho% Hydrologlc SYorniwater/ Wotsr Water Shortllnt .W� 8 �P SY Reg/ert Attenuallon Qua/Ity QuaU(y p�edloa Onsite Wetland(whole basin) Depressional/Tribufary(outlet but no perennfal inlet or drainege enterinp from upstream 0.63 0.50 0.53 0.57 0.00 subwatershed) Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Not Applicable Add�ional Infor�nat�on Malntuiance oj Matrotsnance of AeslheNcs/ Widand Sensiti►vty Additiona! Chorocverls�tic MaTptenance of Charocteristic Rec�adae/ Cround- Wd/and to Stonuwata Stormwater H?ldl�Jb Habl�ar Characterlsdc Awrphiblan Educalloe/ Wats� Restoradon oyd Urban Trtat�wenr Wa/and Nama Structtere Flsh Habltat Habitot (5�ltwro/ Cowr�nerclarl Uses Intaraclion Potende! p�v�%pment Needs Onsite Wetland(whole 0.51 0.47 0.38 0.25 0.00 Combination 0.00 0.50 0.57 Disc�targe. Recharge Moderate Mo�rate Moderate Law Not A pplicable Not Applicable Moderate Moderate Wetland Community Summary _ _ _ � Vegetat�ve Divers�ty/Integr�ty i � Community l � i Weighted 'i ' lndivutual Highest i Average Average � ; Cowardtn GYrcular lant Wetland Conimunity' WeAiasnuf � Wetland Wetland �Wetland Name Location CYass�/Icadon 39 omnrunity Propordon Rating Rating � Rating � Ru�tueg i Onsite WeUand(whole basin) 27-11&23-26-001 L PEM1Cd � Type 3 Shallow Marsh 90 � _0.5 � 0.50 0.30 � 0.46 �� Moderate Low Moderate ! PEMBd � Type 2 'Fresh(Wet)Meadow 10 0.1 I 0.50 i 0.30 0.46 Moderate Low Moderate � ! 100 I � 0.50 0.30 } 0.46 � [; � Q Denotes incomplete calculation data. Wednesday,June 20,2012 Page 1 of 1 MnRAM: Site Response Record For Wetland: North Impact Area Locatio n: 27-118-23-26-001 North Impact Area Plant Community: Shallow Marsh Adjacent area slope Cowardin Classiflca6on: Circular 39: 26-A Centle 100% Croundwater-speciJlc questions PEMCd Type 3 26_B Moderate 0% S8 We�land soils Recharge 26-C Sleep 0% 59 Subwatershed land use DisCharge ¢ Lfsted,rare,specia[speeies? No 6Q We�lond size:soil group Recharge S Rare community or habitat? No _ 61 Wellond hydroperiod ReCharge 6 Pre-European-set!lement condition? No 27 �wnstreom sens./WQ protect. A 62 InledOul(et configuration Discharge � 28 Nuvtent loadtng g 63 Upland lopo relief Discharge Hydrogeomorphology/topognaphy: -- � DepressionallTributary -- Additiona[information 29 Shorefine wetland? NO _ 64 Restoralion potentla[ No g_j Maximum water dep�h 12�� Shorellne Wetland 8_Z %inundated 70% 6S LO affected by res[oration j� Rooted veg.,%cover 0% 9 Immediate drainage-local WS 20 acres 31 Wetland in-water width 0 feet 66 Exfstfng size � 0.36 /0 Esimated sizeiexisling site: (see#66J 32 Fmerg.veg.erosion resistance C Res�orab[e size �•� //_(/p(Q�$�i( L22C2-Lester loam 3 j Erosion potentio!ojsite � Patentia!new wetland ' 7.64 34 Upslope veg./bank protection I1-Wetland Soil L24A-Glencoe loam � 67 Average width ojpo�.buffer 0 feet 3S Rare wild/ife? C 68 Ease ojpotentia!restomtlon 36 Scare/Rare/SJ/S2 community C 69 yy�(rologic alterations 0 j� Vegetalive cover C 70 Potenlial wedand rype 0 jg Veg.communityinterspenion NA 71 Stormwatersensitiviry 8 12 Outle�forjlood contro[ � 39 Wetland delritus C 72 Additiona[treatmenl needs B 13 Outlel for hydro regime � 40 1n�erspersion on landscape C 14 Dominan�upland land use � B Watershed Missfssippi(Metro) 41 Wildfi e barriers IS K'e<<and soil condition B f � 20 g��p��; � 16 Vegetation("/cover) 100%' 1� Emerg.veg,�lood resisrance C�� A�nphibian-breeding potenttal For func�ional ratings, please run the � 42 Hydroperiod adequacy Adequate Summary tab repart. j$ Sediment deflvery � This report printed on: 6/20/2012 43 Fish presence a 19 Upland soi/s(soil group) � 44 Overwintering habita� � 20 Stormwa�er runoJj C� 2 j Subwalershed wetland density � ¢S Wi(dlije species(!is!) 22 Channels/shee�Jlow � 46 Fish habitat quality C 47 Fish species(list) 23 Adjacent buf)''er width 5 feet ¢$ Unique/mre opporlunity No� Adjacent area maiiageinent - - 24-A Ful! �po�a 49 Wetfand visibifity C � 24-B Manicured gpo/, SO f roximity to populalion No I 24-C Bare 0% SI Public ownership � SZ Public access C l Adjacent area diversity/shucture S3 Human inJluence on wet[nnd _—B 1 2S A Narive 10% i S4 Human inJluence on viewshed B 25-8 Mixed 90°h -_ S f Spatial bu,�'er C 15-C Spaise 0% 56 Recrea[ional ac[ivity poren�ia! C s� Commercinl crop--hydro impac� NA � I 1 � � � O � ........ � 0 � a � � y b � p �` � °a 3 a �' m � d � ,A�, � q � q ,�T, ` y ^' a � Q � � � a N O � � Q � n n � � t� � o � N � � "A � S h. N �p � ;� �A l\� � � � ti,;s � g z O � w� ° o �w a n v � rv h t„' � noi �3 � � ° �" �'o� � ..� � �T a i a F'e �' o0 ,A,� .� n � � � � �o �' o � s- ,R,� r— � n `o �d a � �1 0 � $ � � N � � �p � � � � � ; yp � � � � `� � g q � $ � � � �r�w � w� � �� o w� _ £� n 3 � � n ag� �� `� �µ n � a � � ��3 � �t A � a�� 4 a � A: � " a !Q n a �� `�; �� „ � � � ' m �o � ta �a � "� °' �' n �z^ � � � � � �q � s � r,� .—ti_ _ � � � � o� � � kF+�� wi Z � \�\ C �` � r � '�� :. � � � � 3 _ � o � �: � o � o g $ � �t"' `° � � o �p�` a � W � o�� °3. a n � i , � � � Q� �� " " b � � ' S � � �� ; � �� ' � � � �� _—�` a �� o W ti o � '� ' � � o " � 2 �e o ,��e � `� � �C 0. � .o c � o� a � 6p .�' A � � g p a s � W �o= �ti9� `_ ~ — � Q �a � m� '�� a �� o � � �� da � o � o � � � �� e p � `,a - — � � , � o � a � �i o a ,�, � ��a � 0 3 z� � ti � � �� a o � � � � � � � o r o '� � � ` ,� m o � o � � Op II � � �o 0 O � Q � y� a � S � w � � oa �,� oi _ _� _._— � Q �� $ � � a ^ �o � a � � �� A � � oir o � � � ::. �° �L � �. o� F o � _ � fi R �e iy, � — -- 1 � MnRAM: Site Response Record For WeUand: South Impact Area Location: 27-118-23-26-001 South Impact Area Plant Community: Shallow Marsh 57 Commercial crop—hydro impact �NA Adjacent area slope Cowardin Classification: Ciroular 39: 16_A �ntle 100°k PEM1 Cd Type 3 == Groundwate�speciflc questions 26-8 Moderate 0% Plant Community: Fresh(Wet)Meadow 26_C P �o�o sg We�land soi/s Recharge Stee Cowardin Classificatlon: Grcular 39: S9 Subwarershed fand use Discharge PEMBd Type 2 60 Wetland size/soilgroup Recharge ¢ Listed,rare,special species? No 27 pvwns[ream sens./WQ protect A 61 Wet[and hydroperiod Recharge s Ra�r communily or habitot? No 28 Nu�rient loading B 62 /nlet/Ou!!e�configura�ion Discharge 63 Upland topo relieJ Discharge 6 Pre-European-settlemen[condition? No Hydrogeomorphology/topography: 29 Shorelinewetland? No Additiona[inforination 7 DepressionallTributary Shoreline Wetland 64 Restoration potentia/ No g_j Maxrmum waler depth 12 inches 30 Rooted veg.,%cover 0% 6S LO affec�ed by restomtion 8_2 %inundated gp% 31 Wetland in-water widlh 0 feet 9 lmmediale drainage—[oca!WS 20 acres 32 �erg.veg.erosion resis�ance C 66 ��'��ng size 0.12 33 �'osion potentiol ofsite Restomble size �•� 10 Fsimated size%xistingsi�e: (see#66) � Potential new wet[and L 7.88 i 34 Upslope veg./Gunk proteclion � /1-Upland Soi! L22C2-Lester loam 35 Rare wildlije? � 67 Average width ojpoL buffer 0 feet /1-Wet/ond Soil L24A-Glencce loam 36 Scare/Rare/SI/S2 communtty C 68 Ease ojpo�entia!restorntion 37 Vegetative cover � 69 Hydrologic alteralions 0 38 Veg.community in�erspersion C 7� Potentia!wetland rype 0 39 Wetlnnd detri[us � 71 Stormwa[ersensitiviry B 12 Outlet jor flood control B ej� /nterspersion on londreape � 72 Additiona!treatrxen[needs B 13 Outlet jor hydro regime B J 41 Wildlife barriers C Watershed Mississippi(Metro) j¢ Dominanl upland land use B WS# 20 Service Ares: 7 1 S Wet/and soi!condi�ion � Amphlblan-breeding potenlial � 42 Hydroperiod adequacy Adequate For functionai ratings, please run the 16 Vegeta[ion(%cover) 90/o Summary tab report. /� Emerg.vegJlood resislance � 43 F�'h presence a This r rt epo printed on: 6I20�2012 j$ Sedimentdelivery � 44 �'erwinteringhabi�al � /9 Upland soils(soil group) � 4S Wildlife species(!is[J 20 Stormwater runoJj � 46 Frsh habi[at quality C 2[ Subwatershed wetland densiry � 47 Fish species(list) 12 Chonnels/sheetJlow � ¢$ Unique/rare opportunity No Z3 Adjacenl bu./J'er width _ 10 feet 49 We�land visibility � Adjacent area management SO Proximiry�o population No 24_,4 Fu!! 10% s j Public ownership � 24-8 Manicured 90% S2 Public access � 24-C Bnre 0% ,S3 Hunian inJluence on wetland � Adjacent area diversity/structttre $q Human inJluence on viewshed � 2S A Nalive 1p% SS SpatialbuJJ'er � 2S-B Miaed gp% 56 Recreationa!ac[iviry potentia! � 2S-C Spmse 0% Wetland Functional Assessment Summa Malntenance M��,�p�� of Plood/ Downstrea� oj weMand Hydrologic Storu�wated Wett� Wattr ShordJnt Wd/and Nams Hydrogeoiaorpho%gy Rsgtsre Attenuallon Qualiry QuaUty p��aton South Impad Area Depressional/Tributary(outlet but no perennial inlet or drainage entering from upstream 0.63 0.44 0.53 0.54 0.00 subwatershed) Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Not Applicable AddiNona!I�'ormation Male�enance oj Mointananea of AestbeNes/ WeNand Sensltivl;v AddlNona! Charae�erlsllc Malnfenanee of Charoctedstle Rscnaallon/ Croun� Wdland �o S7torarwata Stormwater Wl/d/{fe Habl�al CharactarlaNc Amphlbl,n BOucotlon/ Water Rsstorodoa and Uiban Treanaerot Wetland Name Structurs Flsh Hablfat Hablror Cultwral Comursrclsl Uses lnttrocdon Potentle! pQvslopinenr Needs South Impad Area 0.45 0.46 0.38 0.20 0.00 Combination 0.00 0.50 0.54 Discharge, Recharge Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Not AppNcable Not AppUcable Moderate Moderate Wetland Community Summary _ _ _ ___ __ __ _— � VegetaHve Diversity/Integrity - ' Cominunity Weighted Individua! Highest Average Average Cowardin GYrcular lant Wetland Community Wetland Wetland Wetland 'Wetland Name Locadon CYpssificalion J� 39 Community Propordon Rating Rating Rating Rating � South Impact Area 27-118-23-2fr001 � PEM1Cd ; Type 3 1hallow Marsh 70 0.5 0.50 0.30 0.38 _ _ - - --- --- Moderate � Low i Moderate PEMBd Type 2 Fresh(Wet)Meadaw 30 0.1 � 0.50 0.�-0.38 Moderate Low Moderate i 100 I � 0.50 i 0.30 } 0.38 ❑ Q De�:otes incomplete calculation data. Wednesday,June 20,2012 Page 1 of 1 i r 1 � MnRAM: Site Response Record For Wetland:On-Site Mitigation Area Location: 27-118-23-26-001 On-Site Mitigation Area Plant Community: Freah(Wet)Meadow AdJacent area slape Cowardin Class(flcaUon: Circular 39: 26-A Gen��e �% Croundwater�specific questions PEMBd Type 2 26_B Moderate 50% S$ Weeland soils Recharge 26-C Steep 0% S9 Subwatershed land use Discharge Q Lrsted,rare,specfalspecies? No 60 Wet[and size/soi[group Recharge s Rare com�nunity or habitat? No 61 Wetland hydroperiod Recharge Downs�reomsens./W rotect A 62 InledOutlel confegura[ion ReCharge 6 Pre-European-selllement condition? No 27 Qp — 63 Upland topo relief ReCharge 28 Nuaient loading B Hydrogeoniorphology/topogrnphy: -- � Depressional/Tributary — Additional injorrnation 29 Shoreline wetland? No $_j Maxtmum water deplh 0 inches — 64 Resloration potentia! No %inundated 0% Sho►elJne Wetla�td 6S LO affected by restoratton 8-2 30 Rooted veg.,%cover 0% 9 /mmediate drainage-local WS 20 aCres � - 31 Wedand in-waterwid[h O�feet 66 Extstingsize I 0.5 !0 Esimaled size%xisting site: (see#661 32 Emerg.veg.erosion resistance � Restorable size , 7.5 1!-Upland Soi! L22C2-Lester loam 33 Erarion potential ojsite � PotenUa!new wedand i 7.5 j¢ Upslope veg./bonk protection 11-Wetlond Soi! L22C2-Lester loam 67 Average wid[h ojpot.6q(J'er 0 feet 3s Rare wildlife? � Ease ojpolen�iaf restorallon 36 Scare/Rare/Sl/S2 community No 69 Hydrologic alleratlons 0 j� Vegefative cover NA �� Potentia!wet/and type 0 12 Ou[!et jorJlood con[rof B , 38 Veg.community interspersion NA �j Stormwarer sensitivity B 13 Outlet for hydro regime g I 39 Wetland detritus C 72 Addittonal trea�ment needs B J 40 lnterspersion on landscape C 14 Dominant upland land use � Watershed Mississippi(Metro) j f Welland soi/condilion g 1 `f 1 Wildlife barriers � W� 20 ServiCe Area: 7 16 �e8e�ation(%cover) 80%J j� Emerg. vegJlood resistance C I Anrphibiait-breedingpotential For functional ratings, please run the 42 Hydroperiod adequacy Inadequate Summary tab report. j$ Sediment delivery B I This report printed on: 6/20/2012 ¢j Fish presence ❑A 19 Upland soils(soil group) B a ¢¢ Overwinlering habilat Z� Slormwaler runoJ)'' C � 2 j Subwa�e�shed wet(and densiry � 4S Wildlije species(list) 22 Channels/sheelJlow � 46 Fish habi�a�quality _C 47 Fish species(list) 23 Adjacen�buJjer width 25 feet � ¢$ Unique/rare opporlunity No Adjacent area niaaagen�ent 49 Wetland visibility � 24-A Fu�1 40%� o � SQ Proximity to popula(ion No 24_B Manicured 50/o� 24-C Bare �p% SI Publicowners{�ip � S2 Public access � Adjace�et area diversity/structure S3 Human iq/luence on wetland _� 2S A Na�ive 80%i S4 Human inJluence on viewshed � 2S-B Mixed 10%i fs Spalia!buJ�"er � 2S-C Sparse 10%I S6 Recrenliona!nctivity po[entia! � S7 Commercia!crop--hydro impact NA Wetland Functional Assessment Summary "'°""�"°"" "'°'"``"°"" of Flood/ Downstrsam ojWedond Nydrologlc Sltorwrtwatar/ Watsr Waar Shordlne Wuland Nomr Nydrogaonrorphology Rsglirre Attsnaallon Qwa/hy Qaollry Protectlon OnSite Mifigation Area DepressionaUTributary(oudet but no perennial inlet or drainage entering from upstream 0.83 0.50 0.54 0.73 0.00 subwatershed) tibderate Moderate Moderate High NotApplicable Additlonal Inforn�ation MaJntrnanca oj Molatsnarocs oj AestheNcs/ Wedand Sensitiviry AddldonaJ C/+araeterlstic MalKteroanes oj Characterlsttc Reenallon/ Cround- Wd/and to Storerwater Stor�awater W!!dlife Nabltat Charactsrlsdc AnrphJblan Educalloa/ Woter RestorotJon and Urban Treatnrent Wet/and Na�e SYrucn�re Flsb Habltat Habltot Cultwro/ ConrNrercid Uaes /ateroclloa PotenBo/ Devdop�nent Needs On-Site Mitigation Area 0.70 0.48 0.00 0.31 0.00 Rec�arye 0.00 1.00 0.73 High Moderate Not Applicable Low Not Applicable Not Applicable High High Wetland Community Summary __ Vegetative Diversity/Integrity Coinmunity Weighted i I I Individual Highest Average Average Cowardin CYrcular lant �' Wetland Community Wetland I� WeBand Wetland , Wetland Name Location C7ass�/'tcadon 39 Cominunity Propordon Rating Rating � Raiing � Rating OnSite Mitigation Area 27-11&23-26-001 PEMBd � Type 2 IFresh(Wet)Meadow 100 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 –_ — -- _ High High j High '; - — � 100 1.00 � 1.U0 1.00 ! ❑ � ------–- � � [� Denotes incomplete calculation data. Wednesday,June 20,2012 Page 1 of 1 Wetland Community Summary Heritage Woods Wetland Bank Vegetative Diversity/Integrity Community Weighted Wetland Individual Highest Average Average Size Cowardin Circu/ar lant Wetland Community R'etland Wetland Wetland Wetland ID Subwatershed (acres) Classifuation 39 Community Proportion Rating Rating Rating Rating 27-119-24-02-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PEMA Type 1 Seasonally Flooded Basin 10 1 Watershed 27-119-24-02-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PEMB Type 2 Sedge Meadow 40 1 Watershed 27-119-24-02-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PEMC Type 3 Shaliow Marsh 30 1 Watershed 27-119-2M02-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PUBH Type 4 Deep Marsh 20 1 Watershed 82-028-21-07-0O6-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PEMA Type 1 Fresh(Wet)Meadow 10 1 Watershed 82-028-21-07-006-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PEMB Type 2 Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie 40 1 Watershed 82-028-21-07-0O6-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PEMC Type 3 Shallow Marsh 30 1 Watershed 82-028-21-07-0O6-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PUBH Type 4 Deep Marsh 20 1 Watershed �<�"� *Denotes incomplete calculation data. �..�� Tuesday,June l9,2012 Page 1 of I Wetland Community Summary Heritage Woods Wetland Bank Vegetative Diversity/Integrity Community R'eighted R'etland Individual Highest Ave�age Average Size Cowardin Circular Plant R'etland Community R'etland Wetland Wetland Wetland ID Subwatershed (acres) Classification 39 Community Proportion Rating Rating Rating Rating 27-119-2402-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PEMA Type 1 Seasonalty Flooded Basin 10 1 Watershed 27-119-2402-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PEMB Type 2 Sedge Meadow 40 1 Watershed 27-119-24-02-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PEMC Type 3 Shallow Marsh 30 1 Watershed 27-119-2402-001-M Pioneer-Sarah Creek 4.5 PUBH Type 4 Deep Marsh 20 1 Watershed 82-028-21-07-0O6-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PEMA Type 1 Fresh(Wet)Meadow 10 1 Watershed 82-02&21-07-006-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PEMB Type 2 Wet to Wet-Mesic Prairie 40 1 Watershed 82-028-21-07-006-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PEMC Type 3 Shallow Marsh 30 1 Watershed 82-028-21-07-006-W Pioneer-Sarah Creek 1.460000 PUBH Type 4 Deep Marsh 20 1 Watershed *Denotes incomplete calculation data. Tutsday,June 19,2012 Page 1 ojl � t � r � m a� ~ a � v r � .�i � tl � � a a 4 o � Z Z �� a � �' V �� O1 2 S C �3 4 � b �� a QCZ� _ _ � � 0 � o � �� _ � � � � ° � � w Qq �� ,� �� _ _ � 'w L � � � a n � � m m � � � � � .� � � � o � 0 0 .� .� � .� � � � � � � � o 0 � � � w m � � � � .� .� � � a n a n m m t t � rn � � £ \ � j j p z v � �g �� N s € o 00 �� , m� �m � o� o� N ti O N � � ti � 4 e q o q ,� 'C! N N � � N '� � N m F Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Heritage Woods Wetland Bank Downs�ream Wet[axd Hydmlogic Flood R'ater R'arer Shoreline Wetland ID Hydrogeomorpholo� Reglme SYorage Qua/tty Quallty Protedion 27-11&2402-001-M DepressionaUFlow-through(apparent inlet and outlet),Depressional/Flow-through(apparent 0.88 0.83 0.82 0.93 0.00 inlet and outlet) 82-02&21-07-006-W DepressionaUFlow-through(apparent inlet and outlet),Depressional/Flow-through(apparent 0.88 0.88 0.75 0.93 0.00 inlet and outlet) � �� Tuesday,June 19,2012 Page 1 ojl Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Heritage Woods Wetland Bank Aevthetics, Ground- Wetland R'etland Stormwoter Amphibian Recreatlon, Water Restoraaton Stormwater Treatment Wetland ID R?Id/!fe Habltat Fishery Habitat Habitat Education Co��[ 1Meractlon Potemial SensiJJvity Needs 27-119-2402-001-M High Moderate Low High NotAppiicable Recharge NotApplicable Exceptional High 82-028-21-07-008-W High Nloderate Moderate High NotApplicable Recharge NotApplicabie High High Tuesday,June 19,201Z Page 1 of 1 t k ► � � � d � � o 0 4 � ��y �� S o a�� e o g =��d o �� o d � �4 � � � o � a� m � � � � � � � d Vj � �� 4� � � � ��" � g o 0� V�j � U° � ,� � � 0 e � � �� o 0 V � � �i i � � e�W � � � � �j o :o rci m � ,tggg,,,,,� o 0 � �� o` � � � � „C o 0 � � � � � � � o 0 S N � O N 5 � O� T ti O � �" q O Q � ti � = N N � � N � 3 N aND �j