HomeMy WebLinkAboutDellneation reports-2011-2013 Graham Environmental Services, Inc. 0
Spring Hill Golf Clubi
Wetland Delineation Report
Orono, Minnesota
3
F
Y•7
Ly
ymggq^^ Y
;r
Wetland A—Looking North
December 5, 2011
GES Project No.2011.036
1 Graham Environmental Services, Inc. 51095 Westland Drive
+1 Spring Valley, WI 54767
Phone: 715-778-5730/888-279-2070
Fax: 715-778-5867/888-279-2069
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club
Orono, Minnesota
December 5, 2011
Background
Graham Environmental Services, Inc. (GES) was retained to delineate wetlands
in the vicinity of two areas proposed for improvement at the Spring Hill Golf Club.
The site is located in part of the NW '/ SE '/4 Section 26, T1 18N, R23W,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (Figure 1). As shown on the U.S.G.S. Quadrangle
map (Figure 2), the topography on the site is rolling.
On October 24, 2011, GES conducted an evaluation of the site, collecting data
and delineating two wetland boundaries as shown on a recent aerial photograph
in Figure 3.
Methodologies
The wetlands were delineated using the on-site methods contained in the
"Routine Determinations" section of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "Wetlands
Delineation Manual' (Technical Report Y-87-1, 1987), as well as "Interim Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Midwest Region"
(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2010). This is the methodology currently used to
determine wetlands by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for implementation of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and by Local Government Units under the Wetland
Conservation Act.
GES classified the wetlands under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
Cowardin system, Circular 39 and Eggers and Reed methodologies. Soil colors
described herein follow Munsell Soil Color Charts. Hydric soil properties
described follow Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (Untied
States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M.
Vasilias, G.W. Hurt and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the
National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils).
f
A 4f.
1 r
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club Site
GES Project No. 2011.036
December 5, 2011
Page 2of3
Results
Wetland A
GES delineated a narrow wetland band that bisects a fairway and connects to
additional wetland to the west and east. We would classify the portion of the
wetland within the fairway as seasonally-flooded palustrine emergent (PEMC)
which equates to Type 3 inland fresh shallow marsh under the Circular 39
classification system and 13B Shallow Marsh under the Eggers and Reed
system.
The wetland was evaluated along one transect on the south side of the wetland
strip as indicated in Figure 3. The upland and wetland data collection points
were located approximately at each end of the transect line indicated in Figure 3.
The upland is described as mowed fairway consisting of Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis). The upland slope adjacent to the delineated wetland boundary
rises relatively abruptly and consists of"rough"within a fairway. The transition
between the wetland and upland at the transect location is characterized by a
relatively abrupt change from OBL vegetation to FAC vegetation. Soils also
demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from dark and gleyed silt loam and clay
loam to lighter colored mixed fill.
Wetland B
GES delineated a portion of the edge of this wetland which is part of the same
wetland that was delineated as "Wetland A"to the north. We would classify the
portion of the wetland we delineated as a combination of saturated palustrine
emergent/seasonally-flooded palustrine emergent(PEMB/PEMC)which equates
to Type 2 inland fresh meadow/Type 3 inland fresh shallow marsh under the
Circular 39 classification system and 15B Fresh (Wet) Meadow/13B Shallow
Marsh under the Eggers and Reed system.
The wetland was evaluated along two transects as indicated in Figure 3. The
upland and wetland data collection points were located approximately at each
end of the transect lines indicated in Figure 3. The upland at the east transect
(Transect 1) is described as upland shrubs, trees and "old field" consisting
predominantly of staghom sumac and smooth brome. The upland slope adjacent
to the delineated wetland boundary rises relatively abruptly. The transition
between the wetland and upland at the transect location is characterized by a
relatively abrupt change from FACW and OBL vegetation (Phalaris arundinacea
and Carex lacustris)to mixed vegetation (sumac, brome, gray dogwood). Soils
also demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from very black mucky loam to
lighter sandy loam and loamy sands.
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club Site
GES Project No. 2011.036
December 5, 2011
Page 3of3
The upland at the west transect (Transect 2) is described as planted native
prairie consisting predominantly of switch grass and big bluestem. The upland
slope adjacent to the delineated wetland boundary rises relatively abruptly. The
transition between the wetland and upland at the transect location is
characterized by a relatively abrupt change from FACW and OBL vegetation to
FAC vegetation. Soils also demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from very
black mucky loam to lighter sandy loam and loamy sands.
For more detailed information on each wetland, see data forms in Appendix A.
Jurisdictional boundaries on the wetlands were established where the soil
profiles in the upland soils demonstrated a lighter matrix tone, there was a
change in plant communities, hydrology indicators were absent in the upland and
a change in topography occurred.
Figure 4 and 5 depict the National Wetlands Inventory map and the Hennepin
County soil survey, respectively. Figure 6 shows the Minnesota DNR Protected
Waters Inventory map of the areas evaluated.
Ground photos of each wetland transect location are included in Figures 7 —9.
The information contained herein represents our findings during wetland
delineation activities conducted on October 24, 2011 at the referenced site.
Respectfully submitted,
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
e G ra a -
Professional Wetland Scientist No. 365
Minnesota Wetland Delineator Certified No. 1179
Enclosures
MedIns
Deer Hill Rd
Approximate HunterDr _ op ~- -
Site Location
I'
' M�°Oh
aye tv FT-T or.pe��=--- ';, �^-.;,, �P
> �t
—
nd' -1988'=2006 Micro'soR C i or ief f i hts res
N
Not to Scale
Figure 1. Site Location Map
\ Spring Hill Golf Club
E SOrono, Minnesota
�
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
i
._D'-
WO? I[;, ROA
C
ff
Approximate 25
Site Location
moi....
k
� � - w r. t C ' 1 .►
!e
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 2. U.S.G.S.
\ Excelsior Quadrangle
>- Spring Hill Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
s
•
Ike Yv
O
e
F
Ta • W ^1 .( LT
2
7 Approximate Transect Lo
`2011 MapQuest - Portions �' E
7 r
rwaww 1ia�u
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Wetlands Inventor
Doc S.2011
Wetlands
Review Freshwater Emarwi
Areas Freshwater Forested/Shrub
-Estuanne and Marine Deepwater
Estuanne and Marine
- Fresnwater Pond
- Lake
- Rntenne
- Other
Status
-Digital
Scat
NOMOtgdat
}
No Oat.
r,y
oKrw
o'
lY. s rr arm ffln..r er•.1•.us Fhk ere•1•10Y swan.s red
n tar me avaryaf�-000,..f/ar h—oo W oftfwt
wBM RhYtl�sl�o�/0 tfe YMa w a.f�ies f�b an
YI.MYtlfnA YlaOp�fwb fir.
User Remarks:
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 4. National Wetlands
\ Inventory Map
G Spring Hill Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
S \
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
♦ St.. y + , '.#^�'i r.�`"#"'.*F .'�.� °`Tim.` .•'.
L y
Sy-
Y
00
Le end
L22C2 Lester loam, morainic, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded
L221D21-ester loam, morainic, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded
L22E Lester loam, morainic, 18 to 25 percent slopes
L23A Cordova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
L24A Glencoe loam, depressional, 0 to 1 percent slopes
L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 1 to 4 percent slopes
L49A Klossner soils, depressional, 0 to 1 percent slopes
L132AHamel-Glencoe, depressional, complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 5. Hennepin County
\ Soil Survey
G Spring HIII Golf Club
E, Orono, Minnesota
J \
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
C o
Approximate
Site Location �W�, '
►►�e�,�.A Y37�/ 1� ►yyP
r
rn
rd
^• . Cyd
�1LONG LAKE k� �.•` Is�gP /D��•
' �' r _ ' _ _ Lake
33
Ara
1 $S3ut t 16114
WAYZAtA
N
Not to Scale
Figure 6. Minnesota DNR
\ Public Waters Inventory Map
Spring HIII Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
S \
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
Wetland A— South Boundary Looking Northwest
k
N
Not to Scale
Figure 7. Ground Photograph
\ Wetland A at Transect
G Spring HIII Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
y4 "
�r'• fir. ��t�u��! t t "r{ d °e r v a rhe �
3- k � ✓ v{ trE it � h f
,
p�qq�, 77 • t /:j6
t +.r 1'~ b "r { 3 E fi ?fir '"5���!}• yAIN
Jn�� { 4.
1 t
�t (tM, r• .syo y..y"SSt• l T
r,w
:.•3'ta1''$�.+.' a.�,'�i n\1S+t� ` 'r+•' y ,sr..rYt ;� a•
„� M: ) 0 �*±r r )r�+.°z�'it 1�i4" {��"Y�R�M`h�'�`rh^ 1'l`��1�� ��, +•i tt�
11 � �y���,� )ti g�J ��� � �' ��21'•\ �3V{�r "fie:, a•:� t y Y F wr+, :x i
�j+ ' frt i , k e � 4 r 'r' I t a s•✓ �" �w '"� .�;" d.
:1l
•+;�1, i .�19 ;"' � t"�9�._ M`sari ` �'4t4, °1. A, 4 "Ng
*> `ttSt 'S;i.;�
N -:'3r. � S .�fLyytVp ! .' t� � .')� .,�V�' +4�j�:�`t �t��.�F s'iar �- } �4•' _`r'w�-�{:
10
•'' ? tt 1h y�ir ittj i�, •'S t t Y a.. .t 4 Y`( ir. } li ,.�
Awl
Rot
Wetland B — East Transect (Transect 1) South Boundary Looking Northeast
N
Not to Scale
Figure 8. Ground Photograph
\ Wetland B at East Transect
G Spring HIII Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
S \
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
�` � ,j'" .. .. `\ ~ , Ott{•
4• '�� �`� 7{�!s..:. e •tt. �1&P R 4 ��i+• C �.t.y )g a r
Ls
} t { y
61,
31
M{Y '-G• R}+stG �•l t''`r"
31
J
f4� �,�f
�f� { a f x t
•jy {;. 4 A t 1F J � 1 Y i
rC trF:a�"'t '�,J � ` } ehi Ir' �r �s�` tit-1"}!s`•fi 7j ` t�.#s, } ? .1," ^y ��. �t •! .:.
4✓:�fq,1�. .� � , 1�� 'y,��L, �1� �'� � '{�!$� �� ff':, T �s'� i T � y$� .`�}s g •f �{ y
i�� 'V f�i.•Ks S+. 51 .. y �bR�� t� .�. y i( ! �4�.,. ( q�f4! Y
aPby f x y tTsu /� a;. rf h
t .•` w , trn` .•1,x,3! �'. ... S .i`� .vlxfla ,( tnlyly k.1+ i. S,,•.
y A
Jy+J i'f '�s ♦ .s o�•j w LSx�ik L�r xrsi +! S3F it '��Ie� y �Jr? aEi� y
'r,> ^W s��,(a �� 1Ft�/ a��' ,p,. ti..� � y� ��✓`"� •s� cR' +� fu j'r`�. '
" 4� > �' �T .tg�n.'r p.�"Y' �f1 �"!/jR Rt "'�aY1�' �e•$ f �.+'
//VSs.; - � ,s ��" .F`i* rF='"`i�t1 i+• L�+# l .f- � � � 1 1�� w�-` ,r � s`<
�,..t
,t
�����IiiSO� s-•,r �� ._'. -�.y.,r'4x.•' �r'_»h"'•��..1".r •L � •>�1.. ,..�a�:'�.-�°
d
Wetland B — West Transect (Transect 2) South Boundary Looking Northwest
JA
N
Not to Scale
Figure 9. Ground Photograph
\ Wetland B at West Transect
G Spring Hill Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
S \
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
Appendix A
Wetland A-Transect 1 Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township, Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlarn Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 ;Total Cover
Saplina/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 144 x 1 = 144
3 FACW species 10 x2= 20
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 154 (A) 164 (B)
1 Lemna minor 80 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.06
2 Typha x glauca 30 N OBL
3 Typha angustifolia 30 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Polygonum amphibium 2 N OBL X Dominance test is>50%
6 Bidens cemuus 1 N BE X Prevalence index is<_3.0'
7 Lythrum sah.can a 1 N OBL Morphogical adaptations'(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
154 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 ;Total cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland A-Transect 1 Wetland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: ransect 1 -Wetlar
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc"'* Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 2/1 silt loam
4-10 4/10GY 10YR 4/6 20 C M clay loam
10-20 10YR 2/1 silt loam
*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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) X Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
X Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Redox Dark Surface(F6)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Depleted Dark Surface(177) *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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
X Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(613) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
_3F High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(610)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) 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(65) (C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(68) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 14 Wetland
Water table present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 6 hydrology
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 5 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland A-Transect 1 Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township, Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climaticthydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlarn N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 ;Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
3 FACW species 0 x 2= 0
4 FAC species 100 x 3= 300
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 ;Total Cover UPL species 0 x5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 100 (A) 300 (B)
1 Poa pratensis 100 Y FAC Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.00
2
3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0*
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
100 ;Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Mowed upland fairway planted to Poa pratensis per golf course manager.
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland A-Transect 1 Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 1 -Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc'* Texture Remarks
0-18 10YR 2/1-3/3 mixed clay loam fill soils are mixed fill
*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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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:
Soils consist of mixed fill from past fairway construction. Some mottles noted in fill material believed to be relict.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(613) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(614) _Drainage Patterns(1310)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(81) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) 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) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(68) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlarn Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 15 x 1 = 15
3 FACW species 80 x2= 160
4 FAC species 5 x 3= 15
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 100 (A) 190 (B)
1 Phalaris arundinacea 75 Y FACW Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.90
2 Carex lacustris 10 N OBL
3 Solanum dulcamara 5 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Typha x glauca 5 N OBL _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Cornus racemosa 5 N FACW X Dominance testis>50%
6 X Prevalence index is<_3.0*
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
100 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Wetland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: ransect 1 -Wetlar
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
0-20 N 2/0 Mucky loam
*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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) X Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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(178) 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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
X Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(613) _Surface Soil Cracks(66)
X High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(B10)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) (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(65) (C6) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(69) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 10 Wetland
Water table present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 6 hydrology
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 5 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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? N
Hydric soil present? N Is the sampled area within a wetlani N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (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: 25.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: 15-ft.radius ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhus hirta 20 Y UPL Total%Cover of:
2 Quercus rubra 5 Y FACU OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
3 FACW species 35 x 2= 70
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 5 x4= 20
25 =Total Cover UPL species 80 x 5= 400
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft. radius ) Column totals 130 (A) 500 (B)
1 Bromus inermis 60 Y UPL Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.85
2 Cornus racemosa 25 Y FACW
3 Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Carex lacustris 10 N OBL —Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 _Dominance test is>50%
6 —Prevalence index is 53.0"
7 Morphogical adaptations"(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation`
105 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: )
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? N
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 1 -Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type" Loc" Texture Remarks
0-14 10YR 3/2 fine sandy loam
14-24 10YR 3/3 loamy fine sand
"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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
_2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required;check all that aooly) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) Aquatic Fauna(1313) _Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(610)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) Presence 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(65) (C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
x
Wetland B-West Transect Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 2-Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlarn Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover 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
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 95 x 1 = 95
3 FACW species 30 x 2= 60
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 ;Total Cover UPL species 0 X5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 125 (A) 155 (B)
1 Scirpus cyperinus 30 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.24
2 Typha angustifolia 30 Y OBL
3 Carex lacustris 30 Y OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Agrostis gigantea 30 Y FACW —Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Salix nigra 5 N OBL X Dominance testis>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0"
7 Morphogical adaptations'(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation"
125 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
6 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Wetland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: ransect 2-Wetlar
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
0-20 N 2/0 Mucky loam
*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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) X Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(173) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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(178) 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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(1313) _Surface Soil Cracks(66)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(1314) _Drainage Patterns(1310)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils X Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(65) (C6) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(67) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 10 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
i
Wetland B-West Transect Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 2-Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Namc VWI Classification:
Are climaticthydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlarn N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 2 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
6 =Total Cover
Saoling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: 15-ft.radius ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of-
2 OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
3 FACW species 0 x 2= 0
4 FAC species 80 x 3= 240
5 FACU species 2 x4= 8
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft. radius ) Column totals 87 (A) 253 (B)
1 Panicum virgatum 50 Y FAC Prevalence Index=B/A= 2.91
2 Andropogon gerardii 30 Y FAC
3 Carex lacustris 5 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Solidago canadensis 2 N FACU _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Ratibida pinata 2 N NI X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0'
7 Morphogical adaptations'(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation"
89 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: )
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 2-Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' Loc" Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 3/2 fine sandy loam
10-20 10YR 3/3 loamy fine sand
"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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is reouired:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauiredl
Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(1313) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(B10)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) Presence 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(135) (C6) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(69) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
FieldObservations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
V
W r �'
LLJ
U- p
Z
Q V
U c
N p
eA
G` ,�/ 1/ �\ \\♦ '� "YC O t} !/ / ) 01
co
/)
X dOiX m x I \� ♦ \ t 9 � t 1 !~r // / ////// � /
,.�Ci7
♦V I i ( 1 1 // / t 1 �
Orr N ti _ }\ ; t ; ; ' � ' 1 , ` } 1 \ 1 \ ♦00i
�X � 11 } it } 1\ \\ i 1 4 11 I I I � � \\ \ \ ♦\ \♦ `\__
i4
41 4
4 ' 4
4'
44 44 4
LLI
z
Z
Cy
LO 00
\ \ t X m 1 ` \� ♦ \ \ \ \
to
t res �r
O �
WW 'OR
V" O
II
Q t
V �
N c
00
1 111 tillco
// / A / ! + / J ��\ v°V t7
'\ __--' ✓,,,/ rl 1 /r/ /,///y�•� !' °\1 l\ r X
co
x 00
lco
1 71 / �%///
<
✓j`/ / ��'r',,��i �--�- 4 '44 / Y�iiCO
.- ,.�- r''.,� /,,,•� / 1 y ryi i
---, �— ✓ �� 4 is J/ ,'� ----- // , x Iii 1�oa i
c X X \ \\\ 1 \ \y
m 00
x�
X d ! Iq
��� �-cc
a 1� /0 1� 1tL-11 14 44,14 44,44, 4
J /
/ "tt
h rn
X'/ern .-
\eIrn
61\ ��-
1
CO
h �"l� y i // X
00 _1
x l
x
+W.
Christine Mattson
From: Catherine Bach [cbach@minnehahacreek.org]
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 2:52 PM
To: Stacey.Lijewski@co.hen nepin.mn.us; Peterson, Lynda (BWSR); Doperalski, Melissa (DNR);
Jenny, Melissa M MVP; Tim Johnson; Mike Graham; Christine Mattson
Subject: WCA Boundary&Type Notice of Application - Spring Hill Golf Club, Orono
Attachments: W1 1-31—Boundary&Type NOA.pdf
Good afternoon,
Please find attached a Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Application for a wetland boundary&type determination for
a project area at the Spring Hill Golf Club in Orono. The project area is located on the parcel at 1050 Tamarack Drive
(PID#26-118-23-42-0006). The complete application is included. Comments on this application will be accepted until
4:30 PM on January 4, 2012. Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Thank you,
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*
MINNEHAHA CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT
Think Green - please do not print this email unless necessary
I
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
pp
Replacement Plan Application
p
1 Spring Hill Golf Course
Prepared for: Tim Johnson
Orono, Minnesota
1
Spring Hill Golf Course 13th hole.
DEC I Y 20''
r.
Revised December 5, 2012 Received by
(N F 1-t)!)
N?e>i 9zorh Jr.Ki-r rAis,X1'1 3402 2
' (JIf�4z}.eg6q k��ao�ra�fiyahoo.com
BES Project No. 2012-029
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan
Application Contents
1) Application Forms
a. Minnehaha Creek Water Resource Permit Application
b. PAinnehaha Creek Variance Request Application
c. P,,Iinnesota LocaliStatel Federal Application Form
' d. Application for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits
e. Purchase Agreement for Wetland Banking Credits
' f. Wetland Boundary-Type Application
2) WCA Sequencing Notice of Decision
' 3) Wetlanc Replacement Plan Narrative
4) Project Location Map (Figure 1)
5) USGS Map (Figure 2)
' 6) Overall Grading Plan (Figure 3)
7) North Fill Detail (Figure 4)
' 8) South Fill Detail (Figure 5)
9) Wetland Delineation Report (Appendix A)
' 10)Fazio Letter(Appendix B)
11)MnRAM Summary Table (Appendix C)
12)Buffer Vegetation Management Plan (Appendix D)
13)Adjacent Property Owners List (Appendix E)
' DEC 1 1 ZD12
Received by
1.2 Form
r r
WATER RESOURCEPERA�iIT APPLIC'AT'ION—COMBINED JOINT NOTIFICATION FOR11I
' Use this form to notify/apply to the Miunellaha Creek Watershed DiMict(NICWD).their engineering consultants.and the DNTR of a
proposed projector work which may fall within their jurisdiction.These agencies should advise you of their jurisdiction or pennit
requirements within 10 days.Fill out this fornn completely and mail with your site plan.naps.etc...to the MONM. 18202 Minnetonka
Boulevard,Deephaven,TAN 51191,Keep a copy for Your
records.
YOU MUST OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED AUTHORIZATIONS BEFORE BEGINNING WORK.
1.Property O-,vnerName (First.Last): Pring Hill Golf Club,Tim Johnson
Mailing Address:715 County Road 6 City:Wayzata State:MN Zip:55391
Entail Address:timj@springhillgc.com Plnone:612-812-0374 Fax:
2.Location of proposed project(Attach neap with directions to site):
Project Address: City:Orono
County:Hennepin Qtr Sectiorn(s):SE Section(s): 26 Town-ship(s): 118 Range(s): 23
' Lot: Block: Subdivision: PID:
3. Size of site: Area of disturbance: 18,249 square feet, or 0.42 acres
Volume of excavation(or fill): cubic yards Length of shoreline affected: feet
Area of existing impervious surface: Area of proposed inn elvious surface:
4. Type of permit being applied for(Check all that apply):
El EROSION CONTROL El WETLAND ALTERATION
STORMWATER MANAGE1,1ENT ❑Vl'ATERBODY CROSSING
FLOODPLAIN ALTERATION ❑SHORELINE/STREAIv1BANK EvIPROVEMENTS
Q DREDGING
OTHER(DESCRIBE):
5.Project Purpose(Check all that apply):
SINGLE FAMILY HOME ❑MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOUSING(apartments,etc.
COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION ❑INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRUCTION(churches, schools,etc.)
' ❑ ROAD CONSTRUCTION ❑SUBDIVISIONS(include munber of lots)
®
UTILITIES ❑LANDSCAPING(pools.berms,etc.)
DREDGING ❑SHORELINE STABILIZATION(lakescaping,bioengineering)
' ❑x OTHER(DESCRIBE):
6.NPDES/SDS General Stonnnwater Permit number(if applicable):
7.Alternatives(Describe any other sites or inrethods that could be used to avoid or lnininnize impacts to water
' bodies to achieve tine project purposed.Attach additional sheet if needed.)
see attached narrative
8. Project Tinneline: Start Date:fall 2013 Com letion Date:spring 2014
9.Applicants Representative (Licensed contractor,engineer,etc...)
Business Nauue:Bopray Environmental Services, LLC Representative Nauie:Kelly Bopray, PSS,CWD
Business Address:N7831 920th St Cin.:River Falls State:Wl Zip:54022
Entail Address: kjbopray@yahoo.com Phone:715-307-4577 Fax:
10.Names and addresses of adjoining property owners(Attach list if necessary):
see a0aehed Appendix E
Permits have been applied: City_ l C'oulnty_EL MN Pollution Control Agency_Q_DNR COED
Pennits have been received:City ❑ County ❑ MN Pollution Control Agency ❑ DNR ❑ COE
I hereby notify ne recipients of this form of the project proposed herein and request I be advised of any pervrits or other
detervrivation co cervine this project that I must obtain.I understand that proceeding with work before all required authorizations
are obtained na a subject to Federal.State and/or local administrative.civil and/or criminal penalties..
Z 7 lv
Signa of Property Owner Date
Pagel of 2
r
r
r
� 5 1Q,\S-PLEASE READ CcUWEU LY
A COI?}'OI Itis fond with copies of alI plans.dian'iagi.c:C. .t119}'ueed 10 be'c'!11 t0.aU 1>v"CS1C1'II1thCAld�l belan... Fleas cltet
file:ytptt,lninlr sllacei hrlon'In shote ei rn ttlicr'e}ou ur se►uling this fonts Remen her lu keep a copy fir y'colr re4mds
[3 \INNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG EM\•0IP(Al for NPDE'S phase 11 pennil
The L.UC'.�L C;CiVFRNAiF'�fAl UNIT�LGt�I.cit}'.couutyrn n��ter nunnagemenl oraanixatinrl
rn\11KNESOTA DEPARMENT OF NAWRAL RE-,0 RUES 1\mDNR)Re_'ion,l Office
LIS A.RD{`_'C'URPS OF ETGINFrRS(:1C`Ol
it Dept.of the Alnty.C 0111,5 of L'ncaieers. 5t.Pawl Disnid
ATIN,CO-R- 1'.N]Fifth St En;r.St,NO,XIN'5101•i6�C
rNotes The alw a Agatcie�may ptovicle a cePy of}our complelexi foram to the Miluiesom Pollution C'onRc•I Ageticy i\1PCA,,
ARCA nater gt'alin'recluucrllerlts ILMY aPPIV to}t,t+r Proposal project.
r A7"ft NTION 0,trol►l'SD )=Arlt'nctll'l'}'UtChklUtg dlaltu.8t.dl'erlgUl�.fiiltns.let'ell►ls cl other nL�ngnlLltiotis.i►►chlJing
Inniluellalto Lamy at?ect a land uwr's eligibility for USDA benefits rider the 1985 Food Securirti'Act as artls•►ide.1.Check wilh
your local USDA office to legtlest atld complete Foml AD-1026 ptiot m milialum actit rty
-- - - --- --
. .
Appllcnno:l i%hereby I11liIC tOr a i1C►Illit to a10111DI I!lire nCllrllle`descr ibed hereat. I ce►tify Iliat I 11116 waliar will MC A'D
Rules aad:hat the p opo;ed aclivity will he condacted in complamce trill, line Ruses,l'tut fauuliar i0l,the iidoi almtilm
r caltained i d' al�licatiotl aii&to die best of my l m►nletlee and belief.nil itifomintim is true-CmIliAete Uhl aclmate.I
h:Miler celV! fhnr I pos-ess the a lllholity to midetiake the prot)o%eil activity or I am actuig os the duly autacinzed agent of TIM
aI>t?lican
r -7/1/1j"I 1-04 7�
Si a of pplicautI-Propc•tty0mierl D. Sipikmmlre�fMe11t Wit
r .•OTE,The ipplicaitou must be smied by the property rvvmer where the laoposed activity►s to oalu The apphcalim tomy be
;igned by a dilly ntullotizeil iigeat if a letter beaiiiw the o►igutal simmture of the prtq�eny ottrLt':s cuhmina)omiim flint lire
It Yen►noted ill the peluut aP1:6Cation is the nu010lized deem of Ill.la idowim for all matters relaliiiu to tha pelutit. Please
' protide authorized agenl iakinuation below
.Aeenfo,Naure ti title.Dopray Environmental Services.LLC.Kelly Bopray, PSS, MVQ
ragent's.Addres N7831 920th Street River Falls,WI 54022
�genl's Teltt�lturla 1715 1307-4577
r1 S U.S.C. 5ectloll 1001 plot'rd a that Miele•,et.m any maivici wobi l jluisdiction of auy Jep ilivelit or agency Of the Ullited
Stales lawxiugl 'and nillftltly Ldsifres.couceals or covets op by ally nick.scuenle.or drrice a ulatetial faCl a►bakes 1;m.
false. fidiaou or fitut&i:ent statenteuls or rq)'escmalious o.ilrakes or uses my false wiitulg docs►ttieta lu mviiie smue to
r collnill un'fake.lictitimi: or fr-111rhilem slatenrew ni entry. shall be fined col More Iliac S 1-1.00 or Illpis sled not more that:
five years.er both.
r
rPage 2 of 2
r
1
Request for Variance
And
Statement of Hardship
1
The Board of Managers may hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of
' these:-tiles in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship
because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. The Board of
Managers may grant variances where it is demonstrated that such action will be keeping
with the spirit and intent of these rules. An applicant granted a variance from full
compliance with a requirement of the rules would be required to meet the requirement to
the degree feasible short of full compliance.
In order to grant a variance,the hoard of Managers shall determine that:
• the special conditions which apply to the structure or land in questiun do not apply
generally to other land or structures in the District
the granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,
0 the variance will not impair or be contrary to the intent of these rules.
A hardship cannot be created by the landowner,the landowner's agent or representative,
or a contractor,and must be unique to the property. Economic hardships are not grounds
far issuing a variance.
' A variance shall become void one year after it is granted if not used.
A violation of any condition set forth in a variance shall be a violation of the District
rules and shall automatically terminate the variance.
' Date 1 111 91201 2 Permit #
Applicant Spring Hill Golf Club. Tim Johnson
Address 715 County Road 6
Telephone number 612.818-0374
Property ID number 2611823420006
IVICWD Rule(circle applicable rule(s)):
• Procedural
• Erosion Control
• Floodplain Alteration
• Wetland Protection
• Dredging
1 I
• Shoreline&Streambank Stabilization
' 0 Waterbody Crossing&Structures
• Fees
• Financial Assurances
• Stormwater Management
Description of project:
' Construction of the Spring Hill Golf Club was begun in 1997 and the course
opened in 1999. For playability and safety reasons, Spring Hill Golf Club
proposes to undertake improvements to the golf course along the 13th fairway.
' These improvements would include placing fill into a jurisdictional wetland at two
locations.
The proposed fill areas would result in a total wetland impact of 0.42 acres
' consisting of 0.30 acre (12,950 square feet) in the northern fill area and 0.12 acre
(5,299 square feet) in the southern fill area (see Figures 3, 4 and 5). The
wetland areas to be impacted are primarily Type 3 inland shallow fresh marsh
dominated by narrow-leaved and hybrid cattail. Both wetland impact areas are
above the Ordinary High Water(OHW) elevation so the impacts are not
regulated by the DNR protected waters program.
The TEP has reviewed and on 6/21/2012 the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD)approved sequencing flexibility for this project (Notice of
' Decision attached with permit application forms). The MCWD approval
documents that there are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the proposed
wetland impacts.
See the Wetland Permit application for additional details of the proposed project.
The on-site wetland replacement aspects of the project are being changed with
this variance request.
Requirements of rule(s)
MCWD's Wetland Protection Rule generally follows the guidance and principles
set out under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The MCWD rule
however, holds more strictly to the mitigation citing standards set out in WCA
than does the Board of Water and Soils Resources (BWSR) and the Corps of
Engineers (COE) in their administration for the Federal Clean Water Act Section
404 wetland permitting process. Specifically MCWD requires wetland impacts in
' the watershed to be replaced in the watershed.
Requested Variance
' This variance requested is to allow Spring Hill Golf Club to use 0.84 acres of
wetland bank credits from outside the MCWD as mitigation for the 0.42 acres of
wetland impacts for the reconstruction of the 13th fairway.
' 2
1
Statement of Hardship(include any mitigating circumstances).
When the golf course was originally approved and constructed beginning in 1997
there were 1.45 acres of wetland impacts, which required 2.90 acres of
compensatory wetland mitigation. The golf course plans provided 7.27 acres of
wetland mitigation with the excess 4.37 acre of credits intended for future golf
course maintenance and City of Orono use. However the paperwork to have the
excess credits deposited in the BWSR mitigation bank were never completed,
and due to changes in the WCA and COE Section 404 rules can no longer be
deposited. One of the main reasons these old wetland credits could not be used
t in the current wetland banking system is the plant community is dominated by
narrow leaf cattails which has been listed as a non-native, invasive species.
Even the existing natural wetland is dominated by this non-native, invasive
species which makes the prospect of any new mitigation in the immediate vicinity
' unlikely to meet the current WCA and COE vegetation standards.
The MCWD Wetland Protection Rule, the WCA and COE Section 404 Rules
' follow the general principle that a wetland impact should be replaced with similar
wetlands, and generally in the same watershed in order to maintain the set of
wetland functions and values in a given locality. Where these policies diverge
' and cause hardship for this specific project site is when the Technical Evaluation
Panel (TEP) and the COE conclude that even with best management practices,
on-site mitigation will not result in a wetland that will meet the required
' replacement vegetation standards. In these situation the TEP and COE policy
would be to consider wetland mitigation banking in order to assure that the
wetland impacts are replaced at a minimum 2:1 ratio, with high quality wetland,
' within the same major watershed, prior to any wetland impacts actually occurring.
Although the original golf course plans have shown that wetlands nearly identical
to the proposed impacted wetland can be created on-site, the presence of the
non-native, invasive, species would not allow any mitigation credits to be
assigned under the current version of WCA (MCWD rules) or the COE Section
404 program. There are no other feasible and prudent alternative locations on-
site that would allow for sufficient wetland creation/restoration that would both
meet the MCWD citing requirements and the required vegetation standards. The
TEP, including MCWD staff and COE have reviewed Spring Hill Golf Clubs
proposal for on-site mitigation and determined the preferred option would be to
replace the wetland impacts thorough the mitigation banking system. There are
no wetland banking credits available in the MCWD so Spring Hill Golf Club
' proposes to use credits from the Heritage Woods Bank. The Heritage Woods
Bank was selected because it is considered to have relatively high functions and
values. The Heritage Woods mitigation bank site is located just 11 miles north-
northwest of the proposed wetland impact site. A detailed analysis of the bank
site selection process is included in the permit application narrative. Initially only
a portion of the mitigation requirements were going to be replaced using banking,
but based on TEP and COE recommendation , the permit application is being
t modified by this variance request to use banking to meet all of the current
mitigation requirements. Spring Hill Golf Course has verified that the bank site
has sufficient credits available for the entire mitigation requirements. The TEP
3
and COE have endorsed the use of the Heritage Wood Bank site for the Spring
Hills Golf Club project.
1
How do you propose to meet the requirements of the applicable MCWD rules?
The intent of the MCWD requirement to replace wetland impacts within the
watershed district is to prevent the export of wetland functions and value to other
locations at the detriment of MCWD. Since it has been documented that the
original 1997 project has already created an excess of wetlands of the same
type, same functions and values within MCWD, the replacement of the current
' proposed wetland impacts outside of the MCWD will not result in a net loss of
wetland functions or values in the MCWD. The proposed project is a unique
situation in MCWD where Type for Type wetland replacement has already been
provided on-site and off-site high quality wetlands will be used to mitigate the
' quantity of wetland impacts. The Spring Hill Golf Clubs proposal maintains the
integrity of the MCWD Wetland Protection Rule because it meets the WCA
standards and satisfies the intent of avoiding the export of wetland functions and
' values out of MCWD.
Applicant name: ��C �� eL( Date:
Applicant signature:
' Staff Recommen/onor staff use only) Approve
1
1
' 4
NA-026620-03B (V.2.02 for MS WORD)9/17/2007
Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Form for Water/Wetland Projects
For Internal Use Only
Application No. Field Office Codc Date Initial Application Received Date initial Application Deemed Complete
PART I: BASIC APPLICATION
"Sec HELP"directs you to important additional information and assistance in Instructions,Page 1.
1. LANDOWNER/APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION(See Help 1)
Name: Spring Hill Golf Club,Tim Johnson Phone: 612-812-0374 E-mail:timj@spdnghillgc.com
Complete mailing address:Spring Hill Golf Club,725 County Rd.6,Wayzata,MN 55391
IA. AUTHORIZED AGENT(See Help IA) (Only if applicable,an agent is not required)
Name: Kelly Bopray,BES,Inc. Phone: 715-307-4577 E-mail:kbopray@yahoo.com
Complete mailing address: N7831 920th St.,River Falls,WI 54022
2. NAME,TYPE AND SIZE OF PUBLIC WATERS or WETLANDS IMPACTED(Attach Additional Project Area sheets if needed)
Name or I.D.#of Waters Impacted(if applicable;if known):
' (Check all that apply): ❑Lake ❑River ❑Circular 39 Wetland type:❑ 1,❑ IL,❑2,N 3,❑4,❑5,❑6,❑7,❑8
Wetland plant community type': ❑shallow open water,❑deep marsh,N shallow marsh,❑sedge meadow,N fresh meadow,
❑wet to wet-mesic prairie,❑calcareous fen,❑open bog or coniferous bog,❑shrub-carr/alder thicket,
❑hardwood swamp or coniferous swamp,❑floodplain forest,❑seasonally flooded basin
' Indicate size of entire lake or wetland(check one): N Less than 10 acres(indicate size:5 ac.) ❑ 10 to 40 acres ❑Greater than 40 acres
3. PROJECT LOCATION (Information can be found on property tar statement,property title or title insurance):
Project street address: Fire#: City(if applicable):Orono
'/,Section:SE Section:26 Township#:I I 8 Range#:23W County:Hennepin
Lot#: Block: Subdivision: Watershed(name or#)Minnehaha Creek UTM location:N E
Attach a simple site locator map. if needed,include on the map written directions to the site from a known location or landmark,and
provide distances from known locations, Label the sheet SITE LOCATOR MAP.
4. TYPE OF PROJECT: Describe the type of proposed work. Attach TYPE OF PROJECT sheet if needed.
See attached narrative.
' 5. PROJECT PURPOSE,DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS: Describe what you plan to do and why it is needed,how you plan to
construct the project with dimensions(length,width,depth),area of impact,and when you propose to construct the project. This is the
most important part of your application. See HELP 5 before completing this section;see What To Include on Plans(Instructions,
page 1). Attach PROJECT DESCRIPTION sheet.
See attached narrative.
Footprint of project: 0.42 acres or 18,249 square feet drained,filled or excavated.
6. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES: What alternatives to this proposed project have you considered that would avoid or minimize impacts
to wetlands or waters? List at least TWO additional alternatives to your project in Section 5 that avoid wetlands(one of which may be"no
build"or"do nothing"),and explain why you chose to pursue the option described in this application over these alternatives. Attach
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES sheet if needed.
See attached narrative.
7. ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS: For projects that impact more than 10,000 square feet of water or wetlands,list the complete
mailing addresses of adjacent property owners on an attached separate sheet. (See HELP 7)
8. PORTION OF WORK COMPLETED: Is any portion of the work in wetland or water areas already completed? ❑Yes NNo. If
yes,describe the completed work on a separate sheet of paper labeled WORK ALREADY COMPLETED. (See HELP 8)
9. STATUS OF OTHER APPROVALS: List any other permits,reviews or approvals related to this proposed project that are either pending or
have already been approved or denied on a separate attached sheet. See HELP 9.
10. I amapply'ng for state and local authorization to conduct the work described in this application. I am familiar with the information
' contained i t s application. To the best of my knowledge and belief,all information in Part I is true,complete,and accurate. I possess
the author' undert a work described,or I am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant.
I #Dat
%/ ( 02
Signar�ck
of applicant(Landowner) .Signature f gent( applicable) Date
This bmust be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity and has the necessary property rights to do so. If only the Agent has signed,
pleaseh a separate sheet signed by the landowner,giving necessary authorization to the Agent.
'See Welland Plants and Plant Conrmrmities of Minnesota and Wisconsin(Eggers and Reed,1997)as modified by the Board of Water and So it Resources,
United States Army Corps of Englneers
Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects
Pagel
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT(33 CFR 325) OMB APPROVAL NO.0710-003 Expires Dee 31,2004
The public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 hours per response,although lite majority of applications should require 5 hours or less. This includes
the time for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the data needed,and completing and renewing the collection of information. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden,to Department of Defense,Washington
Headquarters Service Directorate of Information Operations and Reports,1215 Jefferson Davis Highway,Suite 1204,Arlington,VA 222024302;and to the Office of Management
and Budget,Paperwork Reduction Project(0710-0003),Washington,DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law,no person sba0 be
subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to
either of these addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
' PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT:Authorities:Rivers and Harbors Act,Section 10,33 USC 403;Clean Water Act,Section 404,33 USC 1344;Marine Protection,Research and
Sanctuaries Act,33 USC 1413,Section 103. Principal purpose:information provided on this form will be nsed in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine uses:This
information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other Federal,state,and local government agencies. Submission of requested information is voluntary;however,if
information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued.
ITEMS 1 THROUGH 4 TO BE FILLED IN BY THE CORPS
I.APPLICATION NO. 2.FIELD OFFICE CODE 3.DATE RECEIVED 4.DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
YOU DO NOT NEED TO COMPLETE ITEMS 6-10 and 12-26 in the SHADED AREAS.
All applicants must complete non-shaded items 5 and 26. if an agent is used,also complete items 8 and 11. This optional Federal form is valid
for use only when included as part of this entire state application packet.
' 5.APPLICANT'S NAME 8.AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE(an agent is not required)
Spring Hill Golf Club Kelly Bopray,President,BES,Inc.
' 6.APPLICANTS ADDRESS_ 9:AGENT'S ADDRESS
7,APPLICANT'S PHONE NO. 10.AGENT'S PHONE NO.
11.STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATIO f applicable;complete only if authorizing an agent)
I hereby authorize Kelly Bopray to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish,upon
request,supplemental information in sup o of this p application.
APPLICANTS SIGNATURE: DATE: Z �
12.PROJECT NAME OR T1T ee instructio»s)
.13;NAME OF WATERBOD ,IF KNOWN(if applicable) 14.PROJECT STREET ADDRESS(if apphc4lile)
' 15,LOCATION OF PROJECT
16.OTHER LOCA1'JOI DESCItiPTIONS,IF KNOWN see itistructiods)
17:DIRECTIONS
TO THE SrfE; 18:NATURE OF
DIRACTIVITY
' 19.PROJFCTPURPOSE' 20.REASON(S)FORDISCHARGE_
21.TYPES OP.MATERIAL BEING DISCHARGED AND THE AMOUNT OP EACELTYPE IN CUBIC YARDS "
22.SURFACE AREA
IId ACRES OF WETLANDS OR OTHER WATERS FILLED
23:15 ANY PORTION OF tIIE WORK ALREADY COMPLETE? YES NOT IF YES,DESCRIB)3 COMPL$TED WORK
24 ADDRESSES"OE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS
25.LIST OF OTHER CERTIFICATIONS OR APPROVAISIDENIALS RECEIVED FROM OTHER FEDERAL,STATE ORZOCAL AGENCIES FOR
WORK DESCRIBED IN THS APPf.ICATION.
' 26. Appile do is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this
applicatto is omplete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly
authoriz a nt of the applicant.
i Zi Z6
I 7/ i0�v" 11 1�`',1 I z
Signal f pplicant ate Signa re o ge (if art Date
The ap cation must be signed by the person who desi s to ndertake the proposed activity(applicant),or it may be signed by a duly authorized agent if
' the sta ment in Block I I has been filled out and sign I8 U.S.C.Section 1001 provides that:Whoever,in any manner within the jurisdiction of any
dep ent or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully falsifies,conceaIs,or covers up with any trick,scheme,or disguises a material fact or
m ce§any false,fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false,
fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry,shall be fined not more than$10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
' ENG FORM 4345,Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE. (Proponent:CECW-OR)
Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects
Page 2
FOR LGU USE ONLY:
-- Determination for Part 1: ❑ No WCA Jurisdiction
❑ Exempt:No._(per MN Rule 8420.0122)
❑ No Loss: _(A Bt...G,per MN Rule 8420.0220)
❑ Wetland Boundary or type
❑ Replacement required—applicant must complete Part 11
COMPLETE THE SECTION BELOW ONLY IF REPLACEMENT 18 NOT REOUIRED:
Application is(check one): ❑Approved ❑Approved with conditions(conditions attached) ❑Denied
Comments/Findings:
LGU official signature Date
Nmne and Title
For Agricultural and Drainage exemptions(MN Rule 8420.0122 Subps.l and 2B),LGU has received proof of recording of restrictions
(per MN Rule 8420.0115):
' County where recorded Date Document#assigned by recorder
LGU official signature Date
r
i
Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects
' Page 3
' PART 11: REPLACEMENT PLAN SUPPLEMENT
For assistance in campletinng Part 11,contact your Local Government Unit or a professionalconsultant
' 11. DESCRIPTION OF NYETLAND IMPACTS: Complete the chart below: 1)Use one row of boxes for each wetland impact;2)If your project has more
than one wetland impact,reference your overhead view(part of Section 5)to this chart by identifying and labeling"first impact"and"second impact"on
your overhead view;3)If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area,use the first dotted line and leave the others blank;
4)Ifyou have chosen to identify more than one wetland type within a given wetland impact area,use the extra dotted lines to indicate each wetland type,and
identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted area for each separate wetland type within that impact area;5)If you do not have access to some of
this information,call your LGU or SWCD office for assistance. (Photocopy chartfor more impacts,lfneeded.)
DESCRIPTION OF WETLAND IMPACTS
Wetland impact Watershed Watershed Wetland plant Predominant Size of area Existing land use in project
(as noted on name or and Bank community vegetation in impacted area(check all that apply)
overhead view) number(if Service' Area type' impacted (in acres or known) wetland area square
feet)
20 BSA 7 3 reed canary 0.30 ac. ®Housing
grass,cattail 12,950sf ❑Commercial
First --- ❑Industrial
impact ® Parks/recreation areas
®Highways and
------------------ ------------------------------------ - -------------- associated rights-of-way
❑Forested
❑Farmsteads/agricultural
❑Vacant lands
20 BSA 7 3 reed canary 0.12 ac. ❑Public and semi-public
-- ' i
oov t facilities)
grass,cattail 5,299sf [:]Aports
Second ------------------ ------------------ ---------------------------------- ❑Extractive
(gravel
impact pits/quarries)
❑Other:
------------------ ------------------ ------------------ ----------
']f you are identifying only one wetland type within a given wetland impact area,use the fust dotted line and leave the others blank. If you have chosen to identify more
than one wetland type within a given wetland impact area,use the extra dotted lines to indicate each separate wetland type,and identify predominant vegetation and size
of impacted area for each separate wedand type with that impact area.
' TOTALS OF ARE, IMPACTED FOR EACH WETLAND T1TE ON CHART(indicate acres®or square feet❑)
Wetland plant community type':Shallow open water: Deep marsh: Shallow Marsh:0.42 Sedge meadow:
Fresh wet meadow: Wet to wet mesie prairie: Calcareous fen: Open bog or coniferous bog: Shrub carr or alder thicket:
' Hardwood swamp or coniferous swamp: Floodplain forest Seasonally flooded basin
12. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Are you aware of any special considerations that apply to either the impact site(s)or the replacement site(s)? ❑Yes ®No
(Examples:the presence of endangered species,special fish and wildlife resources,sensitive surface waters,or waste disposal site.) If YES,list and describe briefly.
1
13. SHORELAND IMPACT ZONE: Please identify each wetland impact site noted in Section 15 that is within 1000 feel of a lake or 300 feet of a river.
' -See Wetland Plants and Plant Conumaddes ofMinnesoia and Wisconsin(Eggers and Reed,1997)as modified by the Board of Water and
Soil Resources,United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects
Page 4
14. HON PROPOSED REPLACEMENT NH,L BE ACCOMPLISHED: Indicate how proposed replacement will be accomplished(check only one box below
and continue as indicated):
®A. Wetland banking credits only
Complete Application for W ithdraival of Welland Credits Form and include with your application. Copies of this form are available from your LGU,or
download a copy from www.bwsr.state.mn.us
' Skip to Section 19,page 6(You do not need to complete Sections 15-18).
❑B. Project-specific replacement only
Continue with Section 15 below.
❑C. A Combination of wetland banking and project-specific replacement.If using project specific replacement that will result in surplus wetland credits
that you propose to deposit in the state wetland bank for future use,then you must submit a wetland banking application directly to your LGU before or <
concurrently with submittal of this form.Also,Complete Application for W'ithdraival of Wetland Credits Form and include with your application. Copies
of this form and the wetland banking application is available from your LGU,or download a copy from www.bwsr.state.rnn.us
Continue with Section 15 below.
15. DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLAND(S)CONSTRUCTION(Complete this section only If you marked Box B or Box C in Section
14 above):
Describe in detail how replacement wetland(s)will be constructed. If several methods will be used,describe each method. Details should include the
' following:1)type of construction(such as excavated in upland,restored by tile break,restored by ditch block or revegetated);2)type,size and
specifications of outlet structures;3)elevations relative to Mean Sea Level or established benchmarks or key features(such as sill,emergency overflow or
structure height);4)what best management practices will be implemented to prevent erosions or site degradation;5)proposed timetable for starting and
ending the project;and 6)a vegetation management plan. Write this description on a separate sheet of paper labeled DESCRIPTIONOFREPLACEMENT
WETLAND CONSTRUCTION.
See attached narrative.
16. SURPLUS WETLAND CREDITS: If using project-specific replacement(Box B or Box C in Section 14 above),will the replacement result in any
surplus wetiand credits that you wish to have deposited in the State Wetland Bank for future use? ❑Yes ®No. If yes,submit a Wetland Banking
Application directly to your LGU before or concurrently with submittal of this form.Copies are available from your LGU,or download a copy from
%vww.bwsr.state.rnn.us
17. DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLANDS: Complete the chart below:1)Use one row of boxes for each wetland replacement site;2)If
your project has more that one wetland replacement site,reference your overhead view(part of Section 5)to this chart by identifying and labeling"first
replacement site"and"second replacement site"on your overhead view;3)If you are identifying only one wetland type within a given replacement site,use
' the first dotted line(s)and leave the others blank;4)If you have chosen to identify more than one wetland type in a given replacement site,use the extra dotted
lines to indicate each separate wetland type,and identify type(s)of replacement credits and"restored or created"for each separate wetland type with that
replacement site;5)If you do not have access to some of the information, or if you do not know your replacement ratio,call your LGU or SWCD office for
assistance. Photocopy chartfor more wetland replacements,i(needed)
' DESCRIPTION OF REPLACEMENT WETLANDS
Identify Watershed County Section, Wetland Type(s)of replacement credits Restored
Wetland name or Township, Plant (in acres or square feet) or
replacement number Community created?
site (if known) Range Type' New Wetland Public Value Indicate
(as noted on Bank Service Credits(NWC) Credits(PVC) R or C
overhead view) Area
' Name of Watershed Hennepin 26, 118N, 4 0.42 ac_ 0.42 ac. R
First 18,BSA 7 23W
replacement
--------------- -------------------- --------------------------------------
site
Name of
Second --------------- -------------------- ----------------------- --------------
replacement
site --------------- -------------------- ----------------------- --------------
If you are identifying only one wedand type within a given wetland impact area,use the 0.42 ac. 0.42
first dotted line and leave the others blank. If you have chosen to identify more than one TOTAL NWC TOTAL PVC
wetland type within a given wetiand impact area,use die extra dotted lines to indicate each
separate wetland type,and identify predominant vegetation and size of impacted area for REQUIRED REPLACEMENT RATIO'
each separate wetland type within that impact area.
(Ifknown) 2:1
Wetland plant community type: Shallow open water: Deep marsh:0.42 Shallow Marsh: Sedge meadow:
Fresh wet meadow: Net to wet mesic prairie: Calcareous fen: Open bog or coniferous bog: Shrub carr or alder thicket:
Hardwood swamp or coniferous swamp: Floodplain forest Seasonally flooded basin
•See W edwid Plants and Plant Communities unities of Minnesota and Wisconsin(Eggers and Reet4 1997)as modified by the Board ofWater and
Soil Resources,United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Water/Wetland Projects
Page 5
18. ADDITIONAL.INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR PROJECT-SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT(Required only if you marked Box B or Box C in Section 14):
For projects involving at least some project-specific replacement,include the following additional information:
❑Two drawings to scale of the replacement wetland. Include both overhead view and profile(side view or cross-sectional view). See What to Include on Plaits
(Instructions,Page 3)for a detailed description of what should be included in these drawings. Without drawings,your application will be considered incomplete.
❑For created replacement wetlands,include additional soils information(if available)that indicates the capability of the site to produce and maintain wetland
' characteristics.
Note 1: For replacement wetlands located on pipeline easements,you need to receive endorsement of your project from both the easement holder and the Minnesota
Department of Public Safety's Office of Pipeline Safety. Before start of construction,the owner of any utilities must be notified. The landowner or contractor is
responsible for giving this notice by calling"Gopher State Onc-Call"at 652-454-0002(Twin Cities Metro Area)or 1-800-252-1166(all other locations).
Note 2: For extensive or complex projects supplementary information may be requested at a later dated from one or more of the responding agencies.
Such information may include(but not be limited to)the following: topographic map,water table map,soil borings,depth soundings,aerial photographs,
' environmental assessment and/or engineering reports.
19. SIGNED AFFIRMATION:
FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING REPLACEMENT BV WETLAND BANKING ONLY. To the best of my knowledge and belief;all information in Part II is true,
complete and accurate;and I affirm that the wetland losses will be replaced via withdrawal from an account in the State Wetland Bank.
FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING ETPHER PROJECT-SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT ONLY OR A COMBINATION OF NVETLAND BANKING
AND PROJECT-SPECIFIC REPLACEMENT:
Part A: The replacement wetland. 1 affirm that the replacement wetland was not:
Previously restored or created under a prior approved replacement plan or permit;AND
Drained or filled under an exemption during the previous 10 years;AND
Restored with financial assistance from public conservation programs;AND
Restored using private funds,other than landowner funds,unless the funds are paid back with interest to the individual or organization that funded the restoration;and
' the individual or organization notifies the local goverment unit in writing that the restored wetland may be considered for replacement.
Part B: Additional assurances(check all that apply):
®The wetland will be replaced before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a wetland.
❑An irrevocable bank letter of credit,performance bond,or other acceptable security has been provided to guarantee successful completion of the wetland replacement.
®The wetland losses will be replaced via withdrawal from an account in the State Wetland Bank.
Part C. For projects involving any project-specific replacement: Within 30 days of either receiving approval of this application or beginning work on the project,I
will record the Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants on the deed for the property on which the replacement wetland(s)will be located;and 1 will at the same time
submit proof of such recording to the LOU.
To the best of my knowledge and belief,all information in Part II is true,complete and accurate;and I affirm all statements in Part A and C,as well as
checked assurance(s)in Part B.
II�IL'�l2
Signature or appl cant or a ent Dote
' FOR LGU USE ONLY
Replacement plan is(check one): ❑Approved [JApproved with conditions(conditions allaciled) ❑Denied
LGUofcial signature Date
I,GU has reeeive evidence of title and proof of recording of Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Replacement Wetland:
Count),where recorded Date Document 0 assigned by recorder
LGU official signature Date
Minnesota Local/State/Federal Application Forms for Watcr/Wetland Projects
Page 6
' APPLICATION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF WETLAND CREDITS
FROM THE MINNESOTA WETLAND BANK
Return Original to BWSR—Transaction may not be processed without required signatures
1.PROPOSED USER OF CREDITS 2.Impact Site Information
' County Hennepin Major Wtrshd No.20
Name(s)Spring Hill Golf Club Bank Service Area 7
' Address:725 County Rd. 6 Location: '/4 SE'/4 Sec 26,Twp.118,Rge 23
Size of Wetland Impact:0.42 acres
City Wayzata State MN ZIP 55391 Wetland Types Impacted: 3
Wetland Plant Communities impacted 3: shallow marsh
Day Phone (612)812-0374
Required Replacement Ratio:2:1 WCA/local/COE/NRCS
Amount to be replaced using Bank Credits:.043
Email Address timj@springhillgc.com Amount replaced on site: 0.41
Project Name: Spring Hill GC 13`h hole
' Attach replacement plan if additional detail is needed.
3. OWNER/SELLER OF CREDITS 4.Regulating Authority(ies)Approving
Account No. 1410 Watershed No. 18 the Use of Wetland Bank Credits
Replacement Plan approved by(check all that apply):
County:Hennepin Bank Service Area 7
❑ Local WCA LGU: (Print agency name)
Name of Seller:Michael and Melanie DeLuca Local Permit#
❑U.S.Army Corps of Engineers: Permit#
Todd Ullom (Name of Authorized Representative) ❑MN Dept.of Natural Resources: Permit#
(Signature of Seller/Authorized Representative)
El Natural Resources Conservation Service:Permit#
❑Other authority involved:
5.CREDITS PROPOSED TO BE WITHDRAWN FROM ACCOUNT NO.
' Credit Acres Wetland Wetland Plant Community Cost
Sub-Group withdrawn Type (per acre)
A 0.42 4 Deep Marsh $45738
B 0.42 U Upland buffer $45738
[Pick One]
[Pick One]
Totals:
1 acre=43,560 sq.ft. FEE TOTAL:Total credits x fee-per-credit(see Fee Schedule)_ $2,490.99
Enclosed transaction fee,payable to"Board of Water&Soil Resources."
Letters signify credit sub-groups,which represent wetland areas with different wetland characteristics.
' 2Circular 39 types: 1, IL,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,R,U(for Upland Buffer).
3 Wetland plant community type:shallow open water,deep marsh,shallow marsh,sedge meadow,fresh meadow,wet to wet-mesic prairie,
calcareous fen,open bog or coniferous bog,shrub-carr/alder thicket,hardwood swamp or coniferous swamp,floodplain forest,seasonally
flooded basin,or upland buffer.See lVelland Plants and Plant Communities ojMinnesota and Wisconsin(Eggers and Reed,1997) as
' modified by the Board of Water and Soil Resources,United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Page I of 2
BWSR Form:wca-bank-01-withdrawal.doc
Revised 1/5/2011
6.CERTIFICATION OF USER OF WETLAND CREDITS
The proposed riser of credits hereby certifies that halshe: a)either owns the subject wetland credits or has entered into an
agreement to y urchase said credits,subject to the approval of all applicable regulatory authorities and b)has filed appropriate
plans,!pe 'fi tions and application forms with all applicable regulatory authorities that describe the wetland or water resource impacts
for which h ubjec etland credits will be utilized for mitigation purposes.
(Zl l�� tl�� CSL���" ��►�., ��� Z-r-)
a l 7i
1 Autho ii ed i nature of ro sed User of Credits PRINT Name Date
7.REGULATORY AUTHORITY APPROVAL(S)
The llowing authorized representatives of the regulatory authority(ies)identified on page 1 of this application hereby certify that
they have: a)verified that the subject wetland credits are deposited in the account of the owner/seller,b)approved a wetland
replacement plan or other water resource impact under their jurisdiction,and c)approved the proposed use of the wetland bank
credits described herein.
PRINT Name of WCA LGU Official Signature of Authorized WCA LGU Official Date
PRINT Name of Other Regulatory Official(if any) Signature of Other Authorized Official Date
Agency ADDRESS of Other Regulatory Official
8.CERTIFICATION OF OWNER/SELLER OF CREDITS
I am the holder of the aforementioned account in the State of Minnesota Wetland Mitigation Bank and hereby certify that:
1)the credits described in this application have either been sold to the user of credits or I will use them to
' mitigate wetland impacts for my own project,
2)1 have received payment in full from the buyer(if applicable),
3)the credits have not been sold or used in any way to mitigate wetland losses other than for the project
and location identified in the project site information block on the previous page,
4)the subject wetland credits should be withdrawn my account,
5)1 will not have a negative balance of credits after the subject credits are debited from my account,and
6)the Annual Fee for this account has been paid(or will be with an enclosed check).
Authorized Signature of Owner/Seller of Credits Date
9.BWSR APPROVAL AND DEBITING OF ACCOUNT
I hereby certify that the credits have been properly debited from the subject account,effective the date of signature.
Authorized Signature Date
' Upon approval by BWSR,a copy of this instrument will be mailed to the user of the credits,all regulatory authorities involved,the account holder
and the Board Conservationist. A letter will also be sent to the account holder acknowledging the debit and new account balance.
IMPORTANT REMINDERS
' 1. The Owner/Seller of the credits is responsible for submittal of this form,containing all required signatures,to the BWSR
Wetland Bank Administrator so the affected account can be properly debited.
2. No impacts to any wetland or other water resource may commence until the credits have been debited from the Minnesota
' Wetland Mitigation Bank and a copy of this approval has been mailed to the regulatory authority(ies),the account holder and
the user of the credits.
3. It is a criminal offense for a seller of wetland credits to sell credits more than one time. It is the responsibility of the account
holder to report any credit sales that are not noted on the most current official BWSR account balance.
Page 2 of 2
' BWSR Form:wca-bank-01-withdrawal.doc 1\1ail to: Bank C'oordinator.. Board of 1\'atcr�� Soil Resources
Revised 1/5/2011 520 1-allRoad forth St. Paul, N4N 55155
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
FOR
WETLAND BANKING CREDITS
' THIS AGREEMENT is made this L: day of 14�r' 2012 between
Michael and Melanie DeLuca(Seller)and Spring Hill Golf Club(Buyer).
to buy from Seller,the wetland banking credits
I. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees y g .
(Credits)listed below:
CREDITS TO BE SOLD
' Credit Acres or Wetland Plant Community Type Cost per State Fee
Sub- Sq.Ft. Circ.39 Acre or Sq. 6.5% Fee Cost
Grou 1 Type; Foot
' A. 0.065
' B.
0.065
C. 0.065 -
D. 0.065
E. 11,755 SF 4 Shallow Marsh $1.05/SF 0.065 $802.30
F. 11,755 SF U Upland Buffer $1.05/SF 0.065 $802.30
Totals 23,510 SF $1,604.60
Check he if ditto a credit b- s art of is account an are lis n an attachment to this docume
'A separate credit sub-group shall be established for each wetland or wetland area that has different wetland characteristics.
' 'Circular 39 types:1,1L,2,3,4,5,6,7, 8,B,U.
'Wetland plant community type: shallow open water,deep marsh,shallow marsh,sedge meadow,fresh meadow,wet to
wet-mesic prairie,calcareous fen,open bog or coniferous bog,shrub-carr/alder thicket,hardwood swamp or coniferous
swamp,floodplain forest,seasonally flooded basin.See Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and
Wisconsin(Eggers raid Aced,199;9 as modified by the Board of Water and Soil Resources,United States Army Corps
of Engineers..
2. Seller represents and warrants as follows:
a) The Credits are deposited in an account in the Minnesota Wetland Bank administered by the
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR)pursuant to Minn.Rules Chapter
' 8420.0700-.0760.
b) Seller owns the Credits and has the right to sell the Credits to Buyer.
3. p
Buyer will ay Seller a total of$24,686 for the Credits,as follows:
Y
a) ($2;469 as earnest money,.30 be paid when this Agreement is signed;and
b) The balance of$22,217 to be paid on the Closing Date listed below.
Page 1 of 2
BWSR Form:wca-bank-12(purchase agreement�doc
' Revised 6/1/2010
' 4. [® ] Buyer, [❑ ] Seller agrees to pay to a withdrawal fee of$1,604.60 to the State of Minnesota
based on 6.5%of the agreed to purchase price. At the Closing Date, [®]Buyer, [❑] Seller will execute a
' check made out for this amount,payable to the Board of Water and Soil Resources.
' 5. The closing of the purchase and sale shall occur on or before Nov.30,2012(Closing Date)at a time
and place to be determined. The Closing Date and location may be changed by written consent of both
parties. Upon payment of the balance of the purchase price, Seller will sign a fully executed Application for
Withdrawal of the Credits in the form specified BWSR,provide a copy of the Application for Withdrawal to
' the Buyer and forward the same to the BWSR along with the check for the withdrawal fee.
6. Buyer has applied or will apply to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District(Local Government Unit
(LGU)or other othregulatory authority)for approval of a replacement plan utilizing the Credits as the means of
gu
replacing impacted wetlands. If the LGU has not approved the Buyer's application for a replacement plan
utilizing the Credits by the Closing Date, and no postponement of the Closing Date has been agreed to by
Buyer and Seller in writing,then either Buyer or Seller may cancel this Agreement by giving written notice
to the other. In this case, Seller shall return Buyer's earnest money, and neither Buyer nor Seller shall have
any further obligations under this Agreement. If the LGU has approved the replacement plan and the Seller
1 is ready to proceed with the sale on the Closing Date,but Buyer fails to proceed,then the Seller may retain
the earnest money as liquidated damages.
Zee
7l�l�z
1 V((Sig-aneof Seller) (Date) (Sig re of Buyer) (Date)
Page 2 of 2
BWSR Form:wca-bank 12(purchase agreement).doc
Revised 6/1/2010
Minnesota Wetland Conservation
Application f•r Approval of r • Type and Boundary
1. Project/Site Information
Project/Site Name:Spring Hill Golf Club Local Government Unit:Minnehaha Creek WD
' Location (address and/or T, R, Sec.): 715 Co. Rd. 6, Wayzata, MN. Sec 26, T118N, R23W
2. Applicant Information
Applicant Name:Spring Hill Golf Club.Tim Johnson Address:715 Co. Road 6
' City, State, Zip:Wayzata, MN 55391
E-mail: timj@springhillgc.coni Phone:612=812.0374
' 3. Agent/Consultant Information
' Company Name Bopray Environmental Services Contact Person:Kelly Bopray
Address:N7831 920`" St. City, State, Zip:River Falls, WI 54022
E-mail' kjbopray@yahoo.com Phone:715.3O7-4577
' 4. Description of Request
Check all that apply: X Wetland Boundary(must attach wetland delineation report)
' ❑ Wetiand Type (Eggers& Reed and/or Circular 39 type)
5. Signature
By signature below, the applicant requests a determination from the Local Government Unit under
' Minnesota Rules 8420.0225 on the submitted wetland boundary and type information in this application.
The applicant also affirms that they are the owner of the subject property or have permission from the
landowner to pursue this determination.
/% J
Applicant or Mt oriz gent Signature Date
' Important Notes:
The applicant may be required to submit multiple copies of the reportlinformation to the
LGU. The LGU may require the applicant to submit copies directly to Technical Evaluation
' Panel Members. Check with your LGU regarding their submittal requirements.
• The LGU decision must be made in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 15.99.
For LGU use only
Date Received:
Page 1 of 1
BWSR Welland Boundary/Type Application Form 11/10/08
1 'I! ` 1111.
Vtiletland Replacement Plan
Spring Hill Golf Club Improvements
' Orono, Minnesota
' Revised December 5, 2012
' BACKGROUND
Construction of the Spring Hill Golf Club was begun in 1997 and the
' course opened in 1999. For playability and safety reasons, Spring Hill
Golf Club proposes to undertake improvements to the golf course along
the 13th fairway. These improvements would include placing fill into a
jurisdictional wetland at two locations.
PROJECT LOCATION
' The Spring Hill Golf Club is located in the NW IA SE '/4 Section 26, T1 18N.
R23W, City of Orono, Henne�in County, Minnesota (Figure 1). The site is
' divided by County Road 6 (6t Avenue North), bordered on the west by
Tamarack Drive, and Spring Hill Road forms the southern boundary. The
specific project location is limited to on or near the 13th hole. The primary
' land uses in the immediate vicinity of the site include commercial and
residential uses.
' SITE DESCRIPTION
As shown on the U.S.G.S. Quadrangle map (Figure 2), the topography on
' the site is rolling. The golf course is characterized by landscaped
fairways, tee boxes, sand traps and greens with wetlands and upland
hardwoods interspersed. The wetlands on the site are typically Type 2
' (inland fresh meadow) and Type 3 (inland shallow fresh marsh)
complexes. Refer to Figure 3 of the Wetland Delineation Report
(Appendix A) for an aerial photograph of the project area.
1
WETLAND DELINEATION
' On October 24, 2011 and March 9, 2012, GES delineated most of the
boundary of the wetland proposed for impact west of the 13"' hole. The
' Minnehaha Creek Watershed District reviewed the wetland delineation
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan Application
' Revised December 5, 2012
Page 2of8
' with GES and Spring Hill staff in the fall of 2011. GES extended the
wetland delineation on the rest of the basin based on the observations and
documentation reviewed by the Watershed District and reported in the
' delineation report attached in Appendix A.
PROJECT NEED AND PURPOSE
The purpose of the project is to improve playability and safety of the golf
course in the vicinity of the 13th hole.
' The need for the project involves creating landing areas for golf shots that
commonly land at the two locations where fill is proposed in the wetland.
These issues are addressed in greater detail in the "Sequencing" section
below.
' CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The original project resulted in a total wetland fill of 1.45 acres for which
7.27 acres of wetland mitigation credit were provided. The impacts now
proposed would add 0.42 (18,249 square feet) additional acres of wetland
fill (about one-third the amount of wetland originally filled). The proposed
' project is not intended as a "piecemeal" impact to the wetland; in
retrospect, the proposed fill should have been a part of the original permit
application and approvals in the late 1990's.
PROPOSED WETLAND IMPACTS
The proposed fill areas would result in a total wetland impact of 0.42 acres
consisting of 0.30 acre (12,950 square feet) in the northern fill area and
0.12 acre (5,299 square feet) in the southern fill area (see Figures 3, 4
and 5). The wetland areas to be impacted are primarily Type 3 inland
shallow fresh marsh dominated by narrow-leaved and hybrid cattail. Both
wetland impact areas are above the Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation
' so the impacts are not regulated by the DNR protected waters program.
Both fill areas also have an insignificant quantity of fringe Type 2 inland
fresh meadow wetland dominated by reed canary grass. All of the
' wetland impacts are considered to be in Type 3 wetlands.
' The project proposed would require approximately 2,200 cubic yards of fill
material for the north fill area and approximately 2,500 cubic yards for the
south fill area. In the north fill area, a 24-inch diameter pipe would be
' installed beneath the fill in order to maintain the normal hydrologic
connection within the wetland. This north fill area will divide the wetland
into two areas, west and east. The east wetland area will be connected to
the west wetland area via the aforementioned 24-inch diameter pipe. This
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan Application
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 3 of 8
' pipe will be placed with both inverts at elevation 976.8 (flat), 0.2 feet below
the wetland's current 24-inch diameter outlet elevation of 977.0. The pipe
is placed partially submerged in order to allow normal water flow between
' the two wetland areas, as well as to allow good hydraulic
connectivity/water flow and roughly equal high water elevations (west and
east) during the 1, 10 and 100 year storm events. The filled area would
' be seeded with an appropriate fairway mix after final grading.
The south fill would create upland between the existing fairway and
bunker area and the existing upland knoll to the west. The average
elevation of fill material in this area would be approximately 983'. The
filled area would be seeded with an appropriate fairway mix.
' It should be noted that other non-wetland impact improvements are also
P p
being considered in order to make the course more appealing, playable
and competitive.
SEQUENCING
' Avoidance Alternatives
The "no-build" alternative is considered neither feasible nor prudent based
on the need to make the 13th hole playable and the existing bridge safe. If
the proposed fills are not done to make the fairway wider near the green
' and to eliminate the water hazard where the northern wetland fill is
proposed, Spring Hill will likely lose more members due to the difficulty of
the golf course. In a highly competitive golf market, it is important for golf
courses to accommodate its patrons and provide a facility that is at the
level of play of most of its members, not just the better, more skilled
players. Currently, golf balls are regularly lost in the wetland at both
proposed fill areas which results in frustrated golfers and disruptions to the
flow in play resulting in delays. The golfers who struggle most with this
hole are juniors, senior and women golfers. Spring Hill hopes to improve
these two areas so as to improve the hole to make it a more enjoyable
and playable hole for less skilled golfers. Additionally, as Spring Hill's
' membership begins to retire, they are actively recruiting golfers with
families in hopes that they will enjoy the game of golf in the future. This
hole is one that is too difficult for a younger, beginning golfer.
' Alternative Sites
Alternative sites were not explored since the proposed project purpose is
' to improve the existing 13th hole of the golf course.
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan Application
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 4 of 8
' n Alternative Configurations d Impact Minimization a p
In retrospect, the wetland areas proposed to be filled probably should
have been filled during the original planning and permitting for the golf
course. In designing golf courses, it is difficult to foresee how certain
portions of the course will play until it is built and played on over a period
of time. It is also difficult to predict the makeup of the users of the course
and, therefore, whether the course will be too challenging or not
challenging enough. This conundrum is exacerbated by the fact that the
demographics of the golf course patrons change over time. This hole
does not pose as great a challenge for the skilled golfer as it does for the
' less skilled player. However, Spring Hill strives to be a golf club that
includes all skill levels. Currently, the club is limited in its client base due
to the fact that it has a difficult golf course design. Many of these issues
' have been addressed by the golf course designer, Fazio Golf Course
Designers, Inc. in a letter dated March 2, 2012 (Appendix B).
' The primary reason these wetland areas were not proposed to be filled in
the original permit application in the 1990's is that every attempt was
made at that time to minimize the amount of wetland fill as required by
wetland regulations. In this case, minimizing wetland fill by omitting these
fill areas was probably not prudent in light of the difficulty these areas
have caused and the negative impact on play they have created.
1
Reducing the amount of fill in the north and south proposed fill areas is
' possible but is not considered feasible since the project purpose is to
make the 13th hole playable. The proposed impacts at both fill sites has
been greatly reduced from the original plan which would have filled a total
of 0.707 acre. The north fill is proposed to go from the edge of each side
of the fairway and the fairway actually "necks down" at the wetland
crossing. The proposed north and south fill areas are designed to be the
smallest footprint of fill necessary to make the hole playable. If they are
' reduced further, the project purpose will not be fulfilled.
The north fill area represents the minimum area needed to create playable
' upland across the fairway. If a smaller area is filled the problem of play
flow and enjoyment may still exist.
' Economic Impact
1 The economic impact of not improving the playability of the 13th hole is
frankly difficult to predict with any amount of precision. Although it can't
be forecast how many patrons might drop their memberships because of
' the issues described, there is an existing problem that causes the 13th to
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan Application
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 5 of 8
' be inconsistent in terms of its difficulty as compared to the remainder of
the golf course.
' Over the past fourteen years of operation, as the club's members get
older, staff consistently hears the complaint that the course is becoming
too difficult to play. This comment is tied directly to the 13th hole as it is
' the toughest for the average golfer to play. Over the last ten years, minor
changes have been made to make the course easier to play, yet keeping it
a challenge for the better players. The height of the rough grass has been
' lowered to reduce the penalty for missing the fairway. Tee locations have
been moved to aid the higher handicap golfers in clearing hazards with
their tee shots. Sand hazards in direct line of play have been removed to
' avoid an additional penalty a golfer would incur with a bad tee shot.
Consistently, the golfers comment negatively regarding the difficulty in
playing the 13th hole.
1
Sequencing Flexibility
' The TEP has reviewed and approved sequencing flexibility for this project
(Notice of Decision attached with permit application forms).
' The value of the wetland proposed to be impacted must be taken into
account when considering whether or not the proposed project is in the
' public interest. The existing hydrologic interaction of the wetland would
not be disrupted at the northern fill since a pipe would be placed to
accommodate normal exchange of water from the small portion of wetland
' on the east to the larger body of the wetland to the west. The northern fill
area is primarily dominated by invasive cattail and reed canary grass.
The southern fill area is dominated by reed canary grass and invasive
cattail.
For this project, the question of sequencing flexibility comes down to two
basic questions: 1) Is the quality of the wetlands proposed for impact
demonstrably degraded such that mitigation would result in a certain gain
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
wetland impact areas are obviously degraded based on their vegetative
t composition and that the MnRAM analysis bears this out. We further
believe that the mitigation wetlands provide clearly higher functions and
values and therefore that flexibility in the sequencing steps is warranted in
' this case. Please see the "MnRAM Analyses" discussion that follows.
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan Application
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 6 of 8
' MnRAM Analyses
The attached MnRAM summaries (Appendix C) indicate that the overall
wetland basin as well as the north and south impact areas generally score
' "Moderate" for almost every category.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION PLAN
Mitigation Requirements
Wetland mitigation will be accomplished with wetland banking using a
bank site within the same wetland bank service area as the wetland
impacts. WCA rule 8420.0522 Subp.4 indicates the minimum
' replacement ratio for the proposed approach for mitigation is 2:1.
' The total replacement required for the project is 0.84 acre. Mitigation
banking would be used to provide the 0.84 acres (36,498 square feet) for
an overall replacement ratio of 2:1
Off-Site Mitigation
The "Heritage Woods"wetland bank (#1410)would be used to provide the
required 0.84 acres of mitigation credit. This bank has Type 1, 2 and 4
wetland credits as well as upland buffer. It is located in the North Fork
Crow River Major Watershed. Spring Hill has entered into a purchase
' agreement to acquire these credits from the owner of the wetland bank.
' Projected Wetland Mitigation Schedule
January 2013 WSD Approval of replacement plan.
February 2013 Execute wetland banking purchase.
February 2013 Record Declaration of Restrictions from 1997
Other Wetland Banks Considered
Per the TEP's recommendation at the June 4, 2012 TEP meeting, Spring
Hill talked with the City of Wayzata's wetland bank contact person. Based
on that discussion, it is not known whether the City is intending to make
their credits available for public sale or not. Spring Hill was told by the
bank contact person in June 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 13 banks
met one, the other or both of these criteria. Of those 13, two do not have
' enough credit, three are not for sale to the public or the owner could not
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan Application
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 7 of 8
be reached, two are not Corps-approved, one is selling for$2.50 per
square foot (considered to be outrageously priced), and one has just
upland credits (assumed to be a problem for the Corps).
This leaves four banks in Hennepin County that are possibilities for the
Spring Hill Golf Club (Banks#1310, 1346, 1410, and 1414). The only one
t of these banks in the same Major Watershed 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 3
wetland impacts with similar Type 3 or 4 wetlands credits if possible. This
narrows the banks to#1310 and 1410 (Heritage Woods). The Heritage
Woods Bank was selected because it is considered to have relatively high
functions and values. The Heritage Woods mitigation bank site is located
just 11 miles north-northwest of the proposed wetland impact site.
A variance from the MCWD requirement for mitigation to occur in the
same minor watershed and the wetland impact is necessary and
unavoidable. The applicant has maximized on-site mitigation
opportunities and cannot create more wetlands without creating the same
playability issues that are being resolved by the proposed project. There
' are no wetland banks available in the same minor watershed. The
applicant has secured a purchase agreement for wetland bank credits
which are the closest match to the wetland mitigation citing criteria.
WETLAND MONITORING
' Since there is no on-site wetland mitigation there would be no annual
wetland monitoring requirements. The Wetland bank site has been
monitored by the bank owner and reported to the LGU and BWSR in order
to deposit credits in the bank.
UPLAND BUFFER ESTABLISHMENT AND MONITORING
The buffer area established under the 1997 permit is intact and 100%
vegetated. The golf course maintenance and mowing limits currently
demarcate the limits of the existing buffer area around the wetland. As a
result of the proposed wetland impacts "new buffer" will be established at
' three locations at the edge of the fill areas. The new buffer areas will be
planted with a mesic prairie native seed mix (BWSR Mix 35-641). The
current MCWD rule requires a base buffer width of 30 feet around the
wetland being impacted. Because the slopes in the buffer area are
generally less than 10% in the buffer area the average buffer width can be
reduced by four feet. The upland soils in the buffer area are generally
' classified as B and C soils so another two feet can be deducted from the
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Replacement Plan Application
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 8of8
' required average buffer width. The existing 26 foot buffer established in
1997 should suffice for the 24 foot buffer requirement under the current
MCWD rule. Appendix D includes the Wetland Buffer Planting Plan,
' Wetland Buffer Maintenance Plan, and Wetland Buffer Monitoring
Requirements per the MCWD rule.
' OTHER PERMITS REQUIRED
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit(s)
rCorps of Engineers Sec 404 Wetland Permit
MPCA NPDES Permit
City of Orono Grading Permit
' City of Orono Conditional Use Permit
1
3per�'
Medina
•`_1a?r I Ilrl ky �
Approximate Nunturnr
' Site Location
� ra h :�
0 Ave r4 � orano � PI
r»•
w 'Ward Rd
Lohe Later—
Old[q,, tr
.,11 "r!
l E
�:c'.end'f'�1��lit—�OJtUs-rrv+CrmwAtinNnnrl�mdes�mMAl. Al,r.r�A•r•.•r..d�;� Al;- 4
N
Not to Scale
;x Figure 1. Location Map
1
Spring Hill Golf Club
' Orono, Minnesota
, 1 )opraq
Project No. 2012.Q29
fi
r_nvironrnctnta
r
..l
11
JC`
f� •� r _ ,{ WoTrj�f - -Ir4GI w[R 'MYI A� • Y � � � ��"_/QIA _ j ( t �;�, W
r
r
F y r •.
1
Approximate25
r _
--� -=-�- Site Location
Irinit ,.,,;,alai 07;t�x�a -r ,' + RA•�ti _ � �� '""� ,4
r ..
r
�•ti Il �� `" i' jib�"'...i i��� ��Sra ai (('���!„ r11� A •aFi"' 7 � •2f
"` Fv
N ` `
_rte ._'j'.iIL. .'""'�� �:-�,.• • . 't•�,�.---���'� f,� ' �_ �`'•. '"=�t_ .�, «—„ '�
r
1 XI
r
Not to Scale
r
r
rFigure 2. U.S.G.S.
4 :. Excelsior Quadrangle Map
Spring Hill Golf Club
INO . hoPt-ay Orono, Minnesota
r �nviranmental
Project No. 2012.029
r
s em 3
_ 0 �e 9 INV 974.
- FILLSOUTH WETLAND
AREA-3.299 Si
JD #15BB03
( Z, t.i
(�f .4 X �
-W978.01i
-
(98X5.3
V 976Ex
7703 � 6OE
r8%AL DUAL-WALL
HPO L2
9871 Y
N 7.09 rfi8L E< 9 .9
X
986.4
71
y /� S ,�' -24"KOM FES4 X
� � E EOF/HP 5 ,CL
'y y s cr cu RW RAP 77,9 E Ex 981
X81;Q 9$32 7�,i
(y 1 LIL SIL .JIL � /
hr 1 r
�• r
f � - <. ;:/ 79.7 --
`� I
ssr3 + ,F 1710 is-z4"9V"L-wAu •r✓ LIL .IL 11L x
i HDPE a O.00x y 7e.
A
/ � r 77.0 1 \\
1_1s4IL ,lI_ LIL LIL 1L LIL LIL _IL _lli ,IL
24"
HOPE FES 78.6 9 fi
INV
INV 978.90 d,- .
\\ i
3 CY p.3 RIP RAP- _.Ir_ `I'- dr_ `
/JIL L!L LIL LIL 11L SIL JIL
-AIL LIL
EX TOTAL WETLAND FILL:- „z��E
732l1i� _\Lu/_ -.LL \lll/� \L'1lL __l:i__ _�_'. _,L!/ >\Wi -_1L/ .:11/79.1} EN�
N-- "--NORTH - 12,950 SF 0.30 AC) WETLAND #15AA - 79.I � LMU�L!- - 19 A DNR PROTECTED WETLAND-837W ,_ �, ovERF�ow "ETAREA SE
11L �;L 18,249 SF(0.42 AC L LiL LIL SIL �I_ :�L LIL LI ` s7s.o (979.0 EIET 2 eELOY
OR
OHW 976.7 - SEE SHEET zi FOR
100 YR HWL-977.84 Ex SpECIl' "710Hs.
�\ill L_ _�L!/� -�'ilIG_ _�L/�_ _,ii1 i_ x_.1111<. _.LV__78.}2 S X
977.0 _% 982.3
L'
EX
d,_ ,r_ �Ir_ .I_ I_ _`b_ JL, r dl_ JI_ X fib_ Jb_ _._ Jb_
_ 9 -
+'I_ SIL LIL LIL LIL L!L ll�... L1L 1L JIL LIL LIQ
NOTE :THE OHW 976.7 ELEVATION IS
_NIL LNON EXISTENT IN ALL PROPOSED
- - u-NON
AREAS. THEREFORE,
L. NO CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR AT OR
LiL ;!L 11L LIBELOW THE OHW 976.7 ELEVATION. LIL _IL SIL LIL lL
LIL LIL .IL =�L LIL SIL •,IL LIL 'I��� SIL
97 98 81.8 l Lli L LIL LIL �! LI _977 \
991.2 !I= 11L _IL Lli_ =1L 'x44,
-1L 1 '
♦_--
992.7 ♦ u_ 98 ,
\\ X 990.9
983.1 990.2
A
x
74, wpF FES ME:
INV 076.80al
5 CY CL3 RIP RAP %%Lr-
ti
17 T.71
lil ,tti
J1' L �:` ,U T� A ,2 �I (t��r .�i � .1 I`��y�yp t � t4r fu b�a o 7 I ?I'� S t;4
z
' �'t.. t r dl�i� Ip'.C�'xt sr ,�43 y3;Ii7 r r"r�'ty E'�
T
Ir Bdl 4,
fill I t
ft
RMTH WEILAND 170 LF-24- DUAL—WALL
113 FUL AREA-12.950 SF HOPE 0 00015
4.
fir' iM M.,
rx
' - _- / "- - 24-TiCii-FES
XY 976.80
5 CY C0 RIP RAP
ILL All—
r, TOTAL WETLAND FILL:
' �"-` x NORTH - 12,950 SF (0.30 AC)
SOUTH - 5,299 SF {0.12 AQ)
18,249 SF (0.42 AQ
Not to Scale
Figure 4. Detail of North Fill Area
Spring Hill Golf Club
Orono, Minnesota
a
Lnvironmcntcd Project No. 2012.029
\ ;51
SOUTH WETLAND
FALL AREA-5,299 SF - 1-i1 •.)
x
-.<ra741N. 1 E.....n.r..
tll,Ygl!kit 4t,tiP[lµ/aI :CPi�:T•lyP..
f•Pf4;F-I i•;� :iii W.-w;IJ• I�•IUi?i•I•I•f iJ!t•1.3•FS•1•+t:•1.1•P
1•[•i!-1<•Y.<• 33.1.1•}Vt•1•.•1.1.1.1Y•1.1 l•1+»a•
e Ml .I.n-n.;1!en+?R►�rl=T�lT1=FirtTTt!ixtn:ue±!in!►rnlxrs rtFa:!: ::I a.rliialu,iiflid 111"wt ii'ci.ila.tl,o!al 1 lien:a.±iiNiu►uemltil!1I;1i11�tb11iu1 1-
:K4t"T•iC'i.a-a.,•.::-r....la-nn•IIi`;til�Si`e'; a.�♦°^�liwt�i.i...l.i..+,.!•I-.<.a. _ I,•PI�Lu.=��.�; !i±�irai!i�i<.�•..a lig.ii:Hi!.ayxisiltf.�!Mi±a..:Fis•i;�'i��,i.APPI t.Y" .1=;1:.
> s•fil•i a.=.pp »K•6 ev-.. : 1-M- R:lt I:R I 1 r�• r1„;i 1••'111,111 I/a111 P'1 ii1 ; 1 ! 1 Y•4 ;Il.ital+�+M4;l+l llNV:•gi•N�ie+N
b 111 AI ry ;il:ti41:R1iU;H6;�il,9P,a+44.iµA: i; itt Wt 1 I 111:YY!► ia ii j i lii li YS ii`d ltiq:n[1Rti4r l:Vtr :111: Nµ µr]
ay=11 1j1II i1'I�II;11 May ti i:N•i�PlttLtq'i r411+�-'VIf I1P1't1ltlfiR:1'a'll(1tl+ala ISN1111VYt1+III111C111i IIW4+4 W4-P141;i K!”,�y�.'P rt:"+a:l':'A:l:x 1I R:N61:a:Tkt13: I It 11111 ill
-t113:1�h.1d�i!UY!-At����i�!�!t!�!tb!1±�•��.I±tY VtGt;�Wt:1!Fii:1!S�t�:!1!Iu:V W-•,Vi:I:Px:1.tu:tlNl WII :atl4u :xllGlHti1NJ/ 4V. dilW•iJtii 4!ir:^api'rhq[I It WtiltNP=113 141 :•!la!Mt!!!!±r �h!
t viii ltl i+ily::ti4tR-141 :t•:t1i=�tiy%Ki:;tluu:i:i l;utlQ:;li1;41;fiiit.�t1llitik:i iY i,3ty�it ii{4Nlis iiti,My�1 il! ill Nalp I LLtd32�1}1gV!ra l.. tryy�)fl! 'illsiait ii::Nlltl l''illlP liRl�4lllii P IIIiWit,(a.'1'�
±:�1 R�3yyiti VI441/1�ltAI``1:ti'• �i�n11ift�;li�.N1'!tl V'i`I+rC•iRit+J14=11VsV'a1PNx:tila:�:Rf11nV!:T,l;,;l�lt II 1a 114:11liltNlitta li,illVPIt11 "I'a 'ntxnttl4":4erII�WIYI+F14+ •y'V1 x M'iRt+19 1"c4:
I I�i4t I IV t Yr uAa9 W E 11111{`. Y4'14 4 VI+NIM:1+:ilii [1u1µ1=l=Ni l,lfa[,I,r;1a R is t-d l4lil 1lY jtl 1Y1 4 1 YIr t 'atla is l4......i:layltii lid .M141' a�dt1112}l:Ifd
V:•1JJ-[J•W:J•�!•IK•1 R' I 1.1•PPI-I!�� s•j•I�`I-1�'f J• -�1!,.It 1•Ilt•1�1 RI ! �I.1•FHI•I.1 p1'f I• 1•le. t•DxO.4I t!e S•.
�3±i.1'i»!i•`i±ia.t!l:•LP:iaw-ta.e.PnP:.tr st•x.l a.t-s.l.elY'ii µ �' !19�t VIN P y6•b:.l;»:.iQ t1.1;D 4.:•:.ly• •!.!K •:•1•M1S-Yi•1 1 i..a-IY,�IThMi•l.i
NU►il�pUNPpf .170 qit. t=ladlyErtl sitrtihd4fa!q!61�i1ai•F`i�i�i1'iRiI�I HN!�.li•swK.13llG�t3l�•i•i1r'�ili•i Ifti •1w• nP• :��l�ftiatNNl:+ biki r-1�'[xtliti&a�li ! �9t11ty�ilt+t,.j�, 1li:�lt!>li
'-1•P: Y ►rliP. •�•t•li Pl•'•1.1.1. 4W•Pi I•t•i•I� ]•'a•1 t•el•-
ai!i:i:fPra.$iK :;sifi-. :laLl'll�'illi;n•yy y n:.i..l a!e•:I. 1 i u•Po-.s-i.s..•IJJ. J".�1.( •ant•i R•.P i`-{S:iyy 1-aN4�rGiaJJ i'•1-;4`-1�' /'�
tln is++Al 1 i1 J)N1RItlt41}.li.i J:ili[ip�hi aN;fild : II Wary;I�gi�l jl lJaaRR11 i14J.ilIN !I t'qi+il�i'i(;ay i Ji1,'I�it�1tMlld tab.dI1PU:t 1,1 ,1p,lll,la'SafN ItAlPlll• I tli�1l1'q llgip11IJ01dli:tl4lra:gi{' 4.1
i131'111h�t 111 A111R�1yy4N�t11s: I�PA14'141 tiP:illNPl`+iu+nW:Itch.tl it,Vii4114irt14-NL �W4+ ill IJ�P:ut Ii1Nlt41IRa%atY�p N1Y1< :l ltR+.1 aN:A:P i la Rlrbarl tlibll'ri. 1!1}hail •/
ih fl:AN11f4f1i1h41;',P•KIN,x l...........d113111aM•i,1;1�V1•til -::IJ!F�t!Is i�a;1111,�P!�1!0'r'�II:;!!!�• "RGtVib±!It; IMI!:NI NI.4�•ddN .aMli:li,M ht:Ili It.�il,�!.' t444!Ih�WW�e..h ll,,'!1,i_ial
tlp .;Iiari•N"-'" I i r11 ixld'a At liai4 Rld tW I;lal r al iib tt,, p tN:O•bi1W J t•O: 1 ;i ia,±,Ili�ll yl '' 1 lil'R9ili'1q alititi
idly••1'µ1l Nlt .4%W;iiildti,l bll 1p •t wil lfNlt� llhll:i:iil =a•i-1 �:ti:AtfA ';1 Irll.a:nPt-fnP ti Pitl •••t�.talVll•ylllli;ga
' '`Ih UfINNNPpfllada•VNP ill alVt LAt+:9IIa ri'VI f[a rt,K•IY H:N IlIL31 dN1 µM I d M d:lA4h±tlt
••P:•» ••1+fit•1.1 N� d;l'•1 1� 1.1•a•li�
ii/-'� �tJ tJ i t•V+ H• a• ti •t•]-PPI••: a'P ' :iii eRy'ltii li I.�'I;il. 11 :I�iai I! i!'i h!i`a!».� :i:.l . nx; a P :.I.st!•w ���� ► 1 i r. .�. w'
;4 a:.`�u.. :11111 •N+7 11 Nr!+1:illili!p11EF+!a!a±s:li�Lla i,l±3ai Ii:Fl.t't.i I, (K7iu'1�FN i4!ftl?i'(_ 11 j,�yNIFFi�II ,; '�iN { :i(iial 1,., 1t�tr { N I:/lii
i•P'• t V 1.1 �V'b 1•t• 1•�1• Vlt••1•I'g lulu�N Oit R.Y t• +-I �a•x 1-IaY Pay1�1 ♦- �• 1.,,,1•, •t•}I• iw•l:l•].Pt 1' � 1
e•Is:xo'iil�i �PX: Paa . t It.PIJ6J•1 I!< Ili � rYiif-t-. i ti•eaS'iJ- �•1 i• rr PIJ. la.'`•�'ii!i.ii!i..!i•t i�l`i1i�ili
w 1. are:;Prah+ala., 'iP,��i:44.,yg4641i.,111:R�,1;i,3tta.il n;iii,'i4a=:i i{(t1Ra.��r 1� IIJ ;d ar'4'ir0+ AI 4-",bMFtStF ro1•r14 Mtnb '
tllRli!t�tljl�q(yt;11 ,III Iftlll yllltN:llxl-d{i,gtixiFllPlaP::IIANI JrAthlitJp�14�111 tx1t1�•tIl=1RI , IN: ';•i=:K Nitlii• tatktl4altN •1:ltK: 1
L4R%tlayl,y Ql!�-11tpM'I+�a. tlll�ala:llal !w4!PIIN:RwR IIIA .N•e!fTTTirtb[ V 324bt1itl ( Ilyi± ''4 Illal INi?W x iW,ll1a144 It't l!
-'ii l�iigtiiia$;Ii{iik!`4 eI bliiN a 1 h1.yi i tieR1' 1. +1�. i t� u41i P Ii�F;4i:i -P 1' iii t.•.' yhi.l�l tf`111 'ilii l�aidi a p il;
tiI Raoyqlllc yyI 1P''d 1�ap tl+ ff!{EI tN r Iia 1 II,y4/1N RA t ' a 1 I I tllla 1 t•i34 xR 14 INltm 1! Ir ! litdl ' irt� 1411 IRiI-Nt Nt
iailt i4'/iwy111F1[laM4'11 l}1141=1='=1+Ia4111zbhP 111=- 1•tIN aa'iN : IIV. to a1-S11t IVIRtIla1 txR/i14�i i•INi i 111 . EPl'Yta11t 11 iR 4 a r:4it4111 1 111 Mdti ii E
aVPaM:•tW l•1•[aaJlts•I•r Vl•IKa�t•V x•1.1•IJ•1•Mi•1.' i•11N 1•I•+•!•yllt••ilO i• 1 i t�1• f•!Y:•1•!••�1 t•WS•✓ 1 6•1•N•F• } x I t x.:•ia+.it Y'•ta•f
! _.lit 7t.la
,IIrItp itn N141 i!dli/i'�¢Iil4idt l:n AI411;d1tIM -' Iltklt llllrl4 1 4;1 Iit'1 pi PMtN +IiitiP::PANt't:ftk:NNx alnR'4aI:tuxi IFtI[I PIIt Mill InFtt 1111aS i11t4a1yytt iV,:R141:112i1iki=Ial 0,41
' Y1+ll+Nir1YNN1 •1� K+li iaµNlVt+F+F'Iitl1-NN ti:illla:R nll:u I<a,:atla�1s<1:IS11i-c 1, It yt.lpa� 1h1 141W,b,,-:1,1 :I llinm,l I[.i4!:b .•141+II tlt411sa4�n111<1pdYI'Ial�tll;lgrall'VIAaxi'ta
-,•1..� g ! I. Y I•�• •,.Ka- t c-1.1;.-I Illi •�!1�111i�1•Pli VI I.I�WJ 1'•IKJl1 � � - - <VYl.rJ�1�'i;!1:}i±{{
'iiS>P:le Aikl!;gPOlilii�tti i!ili.alli ill 1C. ��I:a Ilna i P"> -t`o'P»t•:. :iF; i,-. •riii�y,Naa' /� �'�`�`•._u'- 4:eaa,�ni i}
i(I V'I,tJ N14 tl(�4iIN.41 t aril 411{1111 N JIIS Utkt III1I N"h 1 ! 1l1i�l; i11R' *ti]lilt ;1 L t tl
141y III II AIt`4 Iti1Ar/ I IN P -d w} 4� IY�t14i.4�:-. Nitrlil 1 111' 7i}
J C PNtW PI I4�/i'�!N i � 1 I�4(t FNlat I t+u � i Yiit u xyl YI xY
:t i N!1s P tot 1a N lilt i/1 N t I t INNI I.d1 Li yyY�11, -• V /•`ti a
' idy IIIJIMp i 11 Nlli 11'1{ 1 a 11.1.•1.1 1 kat�11.i11, �rJ.`Q f. 7
a'i li 1 IW Ni 1$a E�"N I � 11 ikl 11111 K IFat V it �
i J P -I+JMI l 1 1 1 1 I K I -! ''•- ?' f•{
kbl�MuN Pbf it ilb 4t' ;J=W! 11 .. LVI r
! !: l�tii•P� < _111_ 1
a;4R!aiarols k+�P:�P lid�t 4ly,ljlPdl,��;litli�'anl• R I 1
iaE4pp•111'OFI yy'IV, sPn 1 e ilYtiNrl'll 't=1-'xf1 980
.4+:i!1M!I�41P �14!1!�1 44'N•I±il±:41 !".t+ •y` i� l
,riiJti;:;l:l;€;i;;;«iiiulii'lii•- �_ 1•L 7U �_—
/tt°fll I (I:i IPPJ=ilnili i•vdiiY:=:1 �}
Yi11R'1+/1! Nll.tli 111111 tR
31'
iVP•J. .41•:.IN Vt��iiiii'►1.1•,.i1.i� J
dP I' it P:44',la f 1a1 t.!
V µcis laa�arp�slxtraars:
I�dr;litlR N:I,h;t+i ?4l 24" HDPE '=ES
!!y�..P•'ihl
INV 977.007,1191 `
T �x cx
y.' / _!1.- 5 CYQCL3 RIP RAP -1a_ rillNil
i —
a
' Not to Scale
Figure 5. Detail of South Fill Area
' Spring Hill Golf Club
J' Orono, Minnesota
F_nvlr-Unmcnl•.�l Project No. 20''2.029
� Appendix A
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
�vjt."-LLQ
Memorandum
��rtvlrvltrtl�:ltt.t�
N7e a 1 92aih St Kw-r r.II"W))+ou
(:i}}t2 y-d^.E 7 IcjbnF rriy�is y�Iax.cc:m
i
To: Catherine Bach. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
From: Kelly Bopray
' Subject: Wetland Boundary Request
Date: December 5, 2412
1 Within the permit/variance application for the Spring Hill Golf Club project is an app ication for wetland
boundary determination. As you are aware portions of this delineation have already been reviewed and
approved by MCWD. At your direction we are requesting approval cf the rest of the delineation on this
wetland. -he basin is only about 3.5 acres in size and the documentation in the GES wetland delineation
' report should adequately document the wetland boundary that still needs to be approved.
' Print http://us-mg5.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=fs23ioOnpppnp
' Subject: RE: Spring Hill GO
From: Michael J. Graham(mgraham@wenck.com)
To: kjbopray@yahoo.com;
Date: Thursday, October 11, 2012 9:52 PM
' Hi Kelly.
I did delineate almost all of the wetland that has the proposed impacts. The only part of it 1 did not delineate was a
finger on the north end east of the bridge that juts out to the east. That part has nothing to do with any of the
proposed impact areas. Yes,the report was focused on the two impact areas which,at that time, were the only
parts of the wetland that had been delineated. I delineated the remainder(except for that east jut) later. However,
the data in the delineation report should suffice for the whole basin.
Mike
Mike Graham,P.W.S., M.W.D.C.,Wetland Scientist
Wenck Associates hie., 1802 Wooddale Drive, Suite 100, Woodbury, MN 55125-2937
www.wenck.com I mgraham@wenck.com I D 651.395.52291 F 651.228.1969 1 G 651.294.4580 C
' 612.670.4209
FYom:Kelly Bopray[mailto:kjbopray@yahoo.com]
Sent:Thursday,October 11,2012 7:16 AM
' To:Michael J.Graham
Subject: Spring Hill GC
Good Morning Mike,
On the Spring Hill Golf Course,the wetland delineation report specifically says the two impact areas(and
where the mitigation will be)were delineated. The watershed asked how the rest of the wetland
boundary was deturinined. Tim said it was staked by GES.
Is that correct? and can I say say the report was focused on the proposed impact sites.
' Kell Bopray
Y p Y
Bopray Environmental Services, LLC
ki b opray(cr��ahoo.com
1 of2 12/1/2012 11:20 AM
� mX. �
oe
{ F I� r '��IIr F r r F
m X� F� F� � F� � F FF
mX iv �I
O
k 4
�E E IE
I F FF � F
0m
X.
1
Cxr r r
Xo IF F F '' F
m x
x .�
� h �-
X F F F F r
X ,
� F
l� ox hE �r F c F e k F X
F
F m
l I r x co90
C),IE F F h F
X. F F F h F
X.
F I�, F F oo F F F /(
F F Ih F I� F F F h' F F F F • ! `
J
rt\F F F F, Ir F Ir F F Ir F F ✓
F F rz
Ir F " F I h e Ir F F t
xIF F F F "
F F F
t
r r r r F F F
X. <
\... F . <
XA r \
m
WETLAND BOUNDARY DELINEATED BY GRAHAM ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 2011/2012.
LEGEND N
WETLAND DELINEATION
EXISTING BRIDGE
EXISTING STORM SEWER
-- EXISTING CONTOUR
X980.0 EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION
0 TREE/TREE LINE
I
� WETLAND
EXISTING FAIRWAY/GREEN 1 inch = 100 feet
Graham Environmental Servicer, Inc.
J
1 Spring Hill Golf Club
1
Wetland Delineation Report
Orono, Minnesota
1
l 4;z •� .. � g `l: , ter �c" y ,.�, f `�i.. �
1
1
1
Welland A-Looking North
1 December 5, 2011
1
1 GES Project No.2011.036
t Graham. Environmental Services, Inc. 51095 Westland Drive
Spring Valley, wl 54767
Phone: 715.778-5730/888-279-2070
Fax: 715-778-58671888-279-2069
' Wetiand Delineation Report
' Spring Hill Golf Club
Orono, Minnesota
December 5, 2011
Background
Graham Environmental Services, Inc. (GES) was retained to delineate wetlands
in the vicinity of two areas proposed for improvement at the Spring Hill Golf Club.
The site is located in part of the NW Y4 SE '/4 Section 26, T1 18N, R23W,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (Figure 1). As shown on the U.S,G.S. Quadrangle
' map (Figure 2), the topography on the site is rolling,
On October 24, 2011 , GES conducted an evaluation of the site, collecting data
' and delineating two wetland boundaries as shown on a recent aerial photograph
in Figure 3.
' Methodologies
The wetlands were delineated using the on-site methods contained in the
' "Routine Determinations" section of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "Wetlands
Delineation Manual' (Technical Report Y-87-1, 1987), as well as "Interim Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Midwest Region"
' (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2010). This is the methodology currently used to
determine wetlands by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for implementation of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and by Local Government Units under the Wetland
Conservation Act.
GES classified the wetlands under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
' Cowardin system, Circular 39 and Eggers and Reed methodologies. Soil colors
described herein follow Munsell Soil Color Charts. Hydric soil properties
described follow Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (Untied
States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M.
Vasilias, G.W. Hurt and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the
National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils).
S
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club Site
' GES Project No. 2011.036
December 5,2011
Page 2 of 3
' Results
Wetland A
GES delineated a narrow wetland band that bisects a fairway and connects to
additional wetland to the west and east. We would classify the portion of the
wetland within the fairway as seasonally-flooded palustrine emergent (PEMC)
which equates to Type 3 inland fresh shallow marsh under the Circular 39
classification system and 13B Shallow Marsh under the Eggers and Reed
system.
The wetland was evaluated along one transect on the south side of the wetland
strip as indicated in Figure 3. The upland and wetland data collection points
were located approximately at each end of the transect line indicated in Figure 3.
The upland is described as mowed fairway consisting of Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis). The upland slope adjacent to the delineated wetland boundary
rises relatively abruptly and consists of"rough" within a fairway. The transition
between the wetland and upland at the transect location is characterized by a
relatively abrupt change from OBL vegetation to FAC vegetation. Soils also
' demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from dark and gleyed silt loam and clay
loam to lighter colored mixed fill.
' Wetland B
GES delineated a portion of the edge of this wetland which is part of the same
wetland that was delineated as "Wetland A" to the north. We would classify the
' portion of the wetland we delineated as a combination of saturated palustrine
emergent/seasonally-flooded palustrine emergent (PEMB/PEMC)which equates
to Type 2 inland fresh meadow/Type 3 inland fresh shallow marsh under the
Circular 39 classification system and 15B Fresh (Wet) Meadow/13B Shallow
Marsh under the Eggers and Reed system.
' The wetland was evaluated along two transects as indicated in Figure 3. The
upland and wetland data collection points were located approximately at each
end of the transect lines indicated in Figure 3. The upland at the east transect
(Transect 1) is described as upland shrubs, trees and 'old field" consisting
predominantly of staghorn sumac and smooth brome. The upland slope adjacent
to the delineated wetland boundary rises relatively abruptly. The transition
between the wetland and upland at the transect location is characterized by a
relatively abrupt change from FACW and OBL vegetation (Phalaris arundinacea
and Carex lacustris) to mixed vegetation (sumac, brome, gray dogwood). Soils
also demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from very black mucky loam to
lighter sandy loam and loamy sands.
' Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club Site
GES Project No. 2011.036
December 5, 2011
Page 3 of 3
The upland at the west transect (Transect 2) is described as planted native
prairie consisting predominantly of switch grass and big bluestem. The upland
slope adjacent to the delineated wetland boundary rises relatively abruptly. The
transition between the wetland and upland at the transect location is
characterized by a relatively abrupt change from FACW and OBL vegetation to
FAC vegetation. Soils also demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from very
black mucky loam to lighter sandy loam and loamy sands.
' For more detailed information on each wetland, see data forms in Appendix A.
Jurisdictional boundaries on the wetlands were established where the soil
' profiles in the upland soils demonstrated a lighter matrix tone, there was a
change in plant communities, hydrology indicators were absent in the upland and
a change in topography occurred.
' Figure 4 and 5 depict the National Wetlands Inventory map and the Hennepin
County soil survey, respectively. Figure 6 shows the Minnesota DNR Protected
Waters Inventory map of the areas evaluated.
Ground photos of each wetland transect location are included in Figures 7—9.
' The information contained herein represents our findings during wetland
delineation activities conducted on October 24, 2011 at the referenced site.
Respectfully submitted,
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
' 1
AA
e Gra a
Professional Wetland Scientist No. 365
Minnesota Wetland Delineator Certified No. 1179
Enclosures
1
s
s
�rall aIle
`Goren
Nor HI Rd Oaks Palk
Approximate "`""�`°` IJI
Site Location
Z $ �
CC
ShAve
41 i
' Nr- Plpmouth
W fB �¢
z �
W9
Dernefy I z ell
Yong isks—
I '
3o P t•'�a_d P'1� 11 snsa t d rd n on
N
Not to Scale
1 Figure 1 . Site Location Map
Spring Hill Golf Club
+ Orono, Minnesota
' GES Project No.2011.036 J
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
1
►►Q{�ca�6 gQAQ� • d ff .-. /Q1S �a..--r'�.K,�/l t s ,_ +n,�J A+�e
0 1�;,1 a '7 �• �' ,. \fes I{7� Q 7Q
l •, �S • l
`�. .. tlJt17 DEEB ;r kilt!
17\
W �. _ •� _ I,0 ley �. _ r-- 1° '
Q�.< Approximate
1
Site Location
t Trin}t •C '.•,JOiO ��ltto�r� 1 �r • �� hil J� oo
t • t .
✓ •' • .kl ,,y� .� , `LIQ.? Q .F..,
,
�t0`0
15( !l1rJ .. •.I�,� ,.w . ...�C} �f 1 ��Q� 1� `w, .7y., . t.. y�s'� �' oWn
01.
M�� • ' ale ,
5 _
.,I � 1 !. E� t > . , �. .�`�. -�. fes.-'--�'�t�.- ��:� a�° � ', �+•�e ���� '
d � ■ • � :�A !,'' �, s Vit, - �--.. .
x
.:`.aiJ
1
>I'v
N
iNot to Scale
Figure 2. U.S.G.S.
Excelsior Quadrangle
SpringHill Golf Club
( �
4. E S Orono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011.036
Crabam Environmental Services, Inc.
• \
e.
w
c w 7 L
7
. y
•
i
u
, +
_ . . • •� .mix ,�y' ro pN - ►'
t
,
, -
40
n
cl
rl
UVe � d
r y,
y Y
s
i
✓ f
•
• - ;g � � �}��a( 'r.�« fir`
` Approximate Tre'isecl Lc
=011 MapQuest - Portions . 11 EQ i�pb4d`
1
U.S. Fish and VVIldlife Service
National Wetlands Inventor
Doe 1,211
`" *'•' ��
Wetlands
+r t<
Review
wa'r't ..;� Freshwa4r Fu..sn�M•Slvub
rr Areas
l
(� Etwanne antl Manna Coeywaler
t ,
C,. • y, - t }"' ti4 �'� f a�Uanne antl Marine
�', �. *�, "�. �� ��� � •✓ ireefla.na,Pond
yy� wRa• ,��";w4 . lett
Mr
Ilk
t b°
•
status
,z
sc
t
scan
;► ,
r
lu 'r3
r
Iws 14.ra Qwr� v 1 C 4h~ 1NI b M rel
rwyrcMM Iv e+sysv Y _4 A,ee 4ww i..00 m a M eNp.M
wWerA.u4YJ.'a4 J.autl I.e—d...auvJ...f w1A 1►.MAS IMWIi IMI M
' User Remarks:
N
Not to Scale
Figure 4. National Wetlands
Inventory Map
��t�►!J�' `� Spring Hill Golf Club
IE S Orono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011-036
G'raban: Environmental Services, Inc.
ir
1 ,
a .
' Legend
1-22C21-es:er loam, morainic, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded
L22D2Les:er loam, morainic, 12.o 18 percent slopes, eroded
'
L2 2E Lesser loam, morainic, 18_0 25 percent slopes
L23A Ccrdova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
L24A Glencoe loam, depresslonal, 0 to 1 percent slopes
' L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 1 to 4 percent slopes
L49A IClossner soils, depresslonal, 0 to 1 percent s opes
L132AHamel-Glencoe, clepressional, complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes
N
' Not to Scale
Figure 5. Hennepin County
Soil Survey
Spring Hill Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, hoc.
' C O
Approximate
Site Location ., =•. 4�.gw'
MV-111"A 7,j —,
Aw
mr low
low t d,.,d
I•LON(. LAKE
t _�II �I i •�••*+ -1q «M Halt*'
..
46
r lake
WAYZATA
1
N
Nct to Scale
1 Figure 6. Minnesota DNR
•�(' Public Waters Inventory Map t >6Spring Hill Golf Club
Jid
Orono, Minnesota
GES Project No, 2011 0:16
Graham Environmental Services. Inc.
k
° 9
,
r
y
4
r
Wetland A— South Boundary Looking Northwest
k'
N
Not to Scale
' Figure 7. Ground Photograph
Wetland A at Transect
I�11' G Spring Hill Golf Club
' Orono, Minnesota
E
1 Graham Environmental Services, Inc, GES Project No. 2011.036
^V t y
Al
a�-
a �,�
'fit
Y
t
� � �a,•,'1 a i�y , �,, t t 3 a� r
,F��F
—t� *t`
( y
�
_ y
} f �' r •' � '} y,•-'S{ i fl°• i r �'�r ,� f I dy ' + 1� ��+� s.t' f+"� .1, '� � �'*� q �
� a% ,, t � r.4 ", q �•. i .� � �` ir�y wt y. ,,•n �� ��.-� �'a y t�� � '9��'.
�.r, l � .r +. f ' "�,a. � '."� N.r, i � •a � yL.t { y +:�r r; �+ '* .4 1 �,'t
�y�i t�;���.�i w s-.�t�}►tx.t y �`�1 li. . � � �a •"{ t�7�1.. '1� ,�f���l:—+- ti � '�. �'.�� �
.���+% tl' i 11t�T} t ti) ���t` � tt �k � •` 11 \ `i1t ks��� +h"t,� I*�'h.`'�, � '�. �'1i \� h
't � 1 t /lif w •.� �4 � ��' �*��` 1 :'.; � �t �, Y"�4.'+">4 ,l..r j e' ca� �n, }.�,+.
r•
r ■ ♦ I •
IF • •
• `-� ', rev+ + l
j
W 7?,A' - t
� � r �, ''��,�,,'k � ��.�RR++ �,h �` � � E " try "6s r �,. � � ti•,����� „� , p.
a)
►�.�`;
Ti
I 1 r f I � r? r F� 1� , � �* 'i 1� I° y ,�+ d,`�1ti �` A C j�!•l��jS#" �(�` �
�._••� .� [ �� .\�ti rJti
�t
° _r 1� � �. •�.,� rw, fit' ,� � I1;,f j'fy i y '.� (J'` f
...,. �y `� � ' a I��r�rr'f a .1' � ��l � 13�•�k i .`,i� '' ,�l �'�r ,r.
3
I` i r Imo., ` �.y`x[ \l� r�� �`•f--y�i�l�.. r }'
e 1
� r
• • 1 1 a
1
1
� Appendix A
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
' Wetland A-Transect 1 Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
' Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex, none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name qWI Classification:
' Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlarn Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
q Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
' 0 =Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 144 x 1 = 144
3 FACW species 10 x 2= 20
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
' 5 FACU species 0 x 4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft. radius ) Column totals 154 (A) 164 (B)
' 1 Lemna minor 80 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.06
2 Typha x g/auca 30 N OBL
3 Typha angustifolia 30 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Polygonum amphibium 2 N OBL X Dominance test is>50%
6 Bidens cemuus 1 N OBL X Prevalence index is 53.0'
7 Lythrum salicaria 1 N OBL Morphogical adaptations'(provide
g supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
154 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
- present? Y
' Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
' US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
' Wetland A-Transect 1 Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
' Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Nam( qWI Classification:
' Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetiarn N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
' 5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Saolina/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
' 2 OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
3 FACW species 0 x2= 0
' 4 FAC species 100 x 3= 300
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-11.radius ) Column totals 100 (A) 300 (B)
1 Poe pratensis 100 Y FAC Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.00
2
3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is<_3.0*
? Morphogical adaptations*(provide
S supporting data in Remarks or on a
g separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
100 =Total Cover _(explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
' Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
' Mowed upland fairway planted to Poa pratensis per golf course manager.
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland A-Transect 1 Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 1 -Uplan
' Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
' 0-18 10YR 2/1-3/3 mixed clay loam fill soils are mixed fill
t '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(Al) _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) _5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF 12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(Al 1) _Redox Dark Surface(F6)
Thick Dark Surface(Al 2) _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:
Soils consist of mixed fill from past fairway construction. Some mottles noted in fill material believed to be relict.
' HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that aDDlvl Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(B13) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(B14) Drainage Patterns(1310)
Saturation(A3) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) —Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots —Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) (C3) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Soils Geomorphic Position(D2)
' Iron Deposits(135) _(C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) _Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) Other(Explain in Remarks)
' Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
' Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
' Remarks:
' US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
' Wetland B-Transect 1 Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
' Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: OronO/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
' Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name qWI Classification:
' Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlani Y
' 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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
i
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
' 2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
SaDlina/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 15 x 1 = 15
3 FACW species 80 x 2= 160
4 FAC species 5 x 3= 15
' 5 FACU species 0 x 4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 100 (A) 190 (B)
1 Pha/ads arundinacea 75 Y FACW Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.90
2 Carex lacustris 10 N OBL
3 Solanum dulcamara 5 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
' 4 Typha x glauca 5 N OBL _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Cornus racemosa 5 N FACW X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0*
' 7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
g separate sheet)
t 10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
100 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
' 1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
' Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
' Wetland B-Transect 1 Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
' Landform(hiiisiope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex, none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Nam( qWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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? N
Hydric soil present? N Is the sampled area within a wetlarn N
' 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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (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: 25.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: 15-ft. radius ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhus hirta 20 Y UPL Total%Cover of:
2 Quercus rubra 5 Y FACU OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
3 FACW species 35 x 2= 70
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 5 x4= 20
25 =Total Cover UPL species 80 x 5= 400
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 130 (A) 500 (B)
' 1 Bromus inermis 60 Y UPL Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.85
2 Cornus racemosa 25 Y FACW
3 Phalads arundinacea 10 N FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
' 4 Carex lacustris 10 N OBL _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 _Dominance test is>50%
6 _Prevalence index is s3.0*
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
g separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
105 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? N
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
' Wetland B-Transect 1 Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 1 -Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
0-14 10YR 3/2 fine sandy loam
' 14-24 10YR 3/3 loamy fine sand
*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(Al) 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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) _Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
_2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) Aquatic Fauna(1313) Surface Soil Cracks(136)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(1314) _Drainage Patterns(B10)
Saturation(A3) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
1 Sediment Deposits(132) _(C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils _Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(135) (C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) _Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
' Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
1 Wetland B-West Transect Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 2-Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township, Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Let: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Nam( VWI Classification:
Are climaticthydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlani Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover 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
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
' 1 Total%Cover of:2 OBL species 95 x 1 = 95
3 FACW species 30 x2= 60
4 FAC species 0 x3= 0
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 125 (A) 155 (B)
I 1 Scirpus cyperinus 30 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.24
2 Typha angustifolia 30 Y OBL
3 Carex lacustris 30 Y OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 4 Agrostis gigantea 30 Y FACW _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Salix nigra 5 N OBL X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0'
T Morphogical adaptations'(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
g separate sheet)
10 —Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
125 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
' Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
' US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
' Wetland B-West Transect Wetland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: •ansect 2-Wetiar
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
0-20 N 2/0 Mucky loam
*Type:C=Concentration,D=Depletion,RM=Reduced Matrix,MS=Masked Sand Grains. **Location:PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
' Hydric Sol[Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
_Histisol(Al) _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) _5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) X Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF 12)
_2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(173) _Other(explain in remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(All 1) _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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) —Aquatic Fauna(1313) —Surface Soil Cracks(86)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(1314) Drainage Patterns(610)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Crayfish Burrows(C8)
' Sediment Deposits(132) _(C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils X Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(135) ' (C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) _Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) Gauge or Well Data(139)
Water-Stained Leaves(69) Other(Explain in Remarks)
' Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
' Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 10 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
' Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 2-Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Nam( VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlarn N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 2 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/13)1 0 =Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: 15-ft.radius ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 5 x 1 =. 5
3 FACW species 0 x 2= 0
4 FAC species 80 x 3= 240
' 5 FACU species 2 x 4= 8
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 87 (A) 253 (B)
1 Panicum virgatum 50 Y FAC Prevalence Index=B/A= 2.91
2 Andropogon gerardii 30 Y FAC
3 Carex lacustds 5 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Solidago canadensis 2 N FACU —Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Ratibida pinata 2 N NI X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0*
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
' 10 —Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
89 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) Indicators or hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
' Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
' US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 2-Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
1 0-10 10YR 3/2 fine sandy loam
10-20 10YR 3/3 loamy fine sand
t
t
*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(Al) _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) _5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF1 2)
-2 cm Muck(A10) —Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
' Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(1313) _Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
High Water Table(A2) True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(610)
Saturation(A3) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) _(C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(B3) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mal or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(135) _(C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
' Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
t
1 Appendix B
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
Fazio GoIrcoulase Designers, 111C.
Manch 2, 7012
Mr. Tim Johnson
Spring Hill Golf Club
' 725 County Road 6
Wayzata, MN. 55391
Dear Tim,
It is our understanding that the club is being asked to submit tin "Application of Sequence"
which defines to the governing bodies our reasoning for the intended scope on hole 13.
In 1997 in early design stages, our mandate from (lie governing bodies was to impact the least
amount of wetlands; and as a result we created over 20 routing plan versions in an attempt to
satisfy this objective. Our final plan submitted requested impacting the cross hazard wetlands
' that occurs on holes 10 and 13. The request was denied and as a result discussions evolved
around a"banked"wetland credit for use in the future.
Observing the game, we have come to understand that golf would be more enjoyable for most
people if cross hazards were kept to a minimum. As mentioned earlier, hazards that lie
perpendicular to the line of play add penalty shots to the scores of most golfers, and, to our way
' of thinking, a golf course doesn't need a lot of penalty shots to be challenging. For this reason,
the majority of the creeks, wetlands and ravines on our golf courses are designed parallel rather
' than perpendicular to the line of play.
When one encounters a site containing expanses of wetlands such as Spring Hill, our objective in
lying out a golf course is minimizing impacts of wetlands and avoiding perpendicular cross
' hazards created by these same wetlands. When perpendicular cross hazards cannot be avoided in
a routing as the case at Spring Hill, we have a better chance of controlling the outcome of the
' golf shot if we locate the teeing areas close to a perpendicular cross hazard. These teeing area
allow the golfer to "tee up" the golf ball, which is easier to hit than a golf ball lying on the
ground, while the closer proximity creates a shorter distance of carry required by the golfer, thus
' offering a greater success rate to advance the ball over the hazard. In our routing at Spring Hill
we were able to achieve this on the following golf holes 2,5,7,8,10,11,12 and 15, as seen by the
attached exhibit.
U 17755 S.E. Federa111iglnwrtY. Tequesto, P'1. 33469 •561-746-4539 "late• 561-746-;50.3
❑ 401 North Ahnn Streer, Ste. 400, (lender sow,484, i1`C M79,? *828 693-0052 *Firv: 828-6934071
Further wetland areas consideration during the routing of the golf course occurred on golf holes
' 3,5.6,9,12,13,14,16 and 18. We were fortunate to satisfactory route these golf holes so that
adjacent wetland areas became parallel to the intended line of play on the respective golf hole,
which allows a golfer to hit "away or around" and not directly `over" a hazard; resulting in a
more enjoyable golf experience.
Unfortunately,we were unable to route a portion of hole 13 to avoid the wetland, thus producing
a perpendicular cross hazard as seen by the attached exhibit. Unlike aforementioned holes, the
difference on hole 13 that exasperates the problem is we cannot control where a golfer hits their
second shot from. This is dependent on how far they advanced their tee shot down the fairway.
The second or sometimes third shot (less skilled) required to advance the golf ball over the
perpendicular cross hazard is that the golf ball is lying on the ground (not a golf tee), which
increases difficulty. The golfer then must advance his or her next shot a great distance down the
fairway, which requires a fairway wood (low loft club) to travel this distance. These two factors
of getting the golf ball airborne from the ground with a low lofted club create a very high degree
Iof difficulty for the majority of our members.
During my site visit in August of 2011, 1 watched three foursome's play the 13"' golf hole; of
which five golfers hit their golf ball into the perpendicular cross hazard on this hole. When this
occurs, the rules of golf provide some relief, that one can move closer to the hazard for their next
shot. Of these five golfers that took relief, two yet hit a consecutive shot into the cross hazard.
' We respectfully request that you take into consideration the above, and know that we strongly
desired to eliminate this perpendicular cross hazard in 1997 but were not given consent by the
' governing bodies, Our average age of member has since increased by 10 plus years and albeit
they still enjoy most that Spring Hill has to offer, the overriding negative factor is the difficulty
and unenjoyably golf experience tit hole 13.
' Best negnrdx,
thc�tt�►i:�r '�'1"1.►r
U 0755.1U.'. Pederirl l/ig-herrn-, 7rquexlr'i. VL 33469 -561-746-4.539 r k-o : 561-746-7-103
LI 4W Vowb iSlah)Sirees. S(e. 40n. YC '187G2 Fir- N2M-693-00',`i
� Appendix C
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
MnRAM: Site Response Record
For Wetland:Onsite Wetland(whole bas
Location: 27-118-23-26-001
Onsite Wetland (whole basin)
Adjacent area sl
r—
Plant Community: Shallow Marsh 57 Commercial crop--hydro impact INA
ope -- ,
Cowardin Classification: Circular 39: 26_A Gentle 100%
PEM1Cd Type 3 Croundrvater-specific questions
26-B Moderate 0%
Plant Community: Fresh(Wet)Meadowpoi S8 Wetland soils Discharge
Cowardin Classification: Circular 39: 26-C Steep - S9 Subwatershed land use Discharge
PEMBd Type 2 — 60 Wetland sizelsollgroup Recharge
Listed,rare,special species? No
4 p p 27 Downstream sensJWQ protect. A 61 Wetland hydropertod Recharge
-- 62 Inlet/Outlet configuration Discharge
S Rare community or habitat? No 28 NO-len,loading B 63 Upland topo relief Discharge
' 6 Pre-European-settlement condition? No
Bydrogeomorphology/topography: 29 Shoreline wetland? No_ Additional Information
7 Depresslonal(Tributary Shoreline Welland 64 Restoration potential No
' 8-1 Maximum water depth 24 inches 30 Rooted veg.,%cover 1FO_% 65 LO affected by restoration
%inundated 70% 31 Wetland in-water width 0 feet
'
8-2 � 66 Existing size
Em8
9 Immediate drainage--local WS 20 acres 32 erg.veg.erosion resistance 33 Erosion potential ofsite � Restorable size 0—
/0 Esimated size%xisting site: (see#66) � Potential new wetland 0
34 Upslope veg./bank protection
11-Upland Soil L22C2-Lester loam 35 Rare wildlife? NO 67 Average width of pol.buffer 0 feet
' II-Weiland Soil L24A-Glencoe loam 36 Scare/Rare/SI/S2 community No 68 Ease ofpotenttal restoration
37 Vegetative cover C 69 Hydrologic alterations 0
j$ Veg.community interspersion C 70 Potential wetland type 0
Wetland detritus C 71 Stornnvatersensltiviry B
39 I_ 72 Additional treatment needs B
12 Ourlerforftood control B 40 Interspersion on landscape C
i
13 Outlet jar hydro regime B 41 Wildlife barrier C Watershed Mississippi(Metro)
' 14 Dominant upland land use B WS# 20 Service Area: 7
fs Wetland soil condition B l Amphibian-breeding potential For functional ratings,please run the
16 Vegetation I`%cover) 96% 42 Hydroperiod adequacy F Adequate
Summary tab report.
' 17 Emerg.vegflaad resistance 43 Fish presence This report printed on: 6/20/2012
18 Sediment delivery B i 44 Overwintering habitat i ^ i
W1ldf e s cies lit
19 Upland soils(soil group) B 4S if Pe (' )
' 20 Stormwater runoff C ! 46 Fish habitat quality C
21 Subwatershed wetland density B J 97 Fish species(list)
22 Channels/sheetjtaw A
4$ Unique/rare opportunity No j
' 23 Adjacent blrffer width 15 feet 49 Welland visibility C
Adjacent area management SO Proximity to population No
'
24-A Full 30%J S1 Public ownership B ,
24-B Manicured 70%° 52 Public access
24-C Bare 0% , 53 Human influence on wetland B-]
' Adjacent area diversity/structure 54 Human Influence on vlewshed
25-A Native 20% SS SpartaI buffer C I,
25_$ Mired 56 Recreational activity potentia! C_
' 25-C Spare 0% _--
Weiland Functional Assessment Summary Maintenance Maintenance
Of Flood/ Downstream of Wetland
Hydrologic Slormwater/ Water Water Shoreline
Wetland Name Hydrogeomorphology Regime Attenuation Quality Quality protection
Onsite Wedand(whale basin) Depressional/Tributary(outlet but no perennial Inlet or drainage enterirp from upstream 0.63 0.50 0.53 OS7 0.00
subwatershed)
Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Not Applicable
AtldwRallaformation
Maintenance of Maintenance of Aesdwdesl Wetland Senshivity Additional
Characteristic Maintenance of Characteristic Recreadon/ Ground- Weiland toStormwater Stormwater
Wildlife Habitat Characteristic Amphibian Education/ Water Restoration and Urban Treatment
Wetland Name Structure Fish Habitat Habitat Cultural Commercial Uses Interaction potential Development Needs
Onsite Welland(whole 0.51 0.47 0.38 0.25 0.00 Combination 0.00 0.50 0.57
Discharge.
Red-Ve
Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Not Applicable Not Applicable Moderate Moderate
Wedand Community Summary --1.-..---- -.-
Vegetative
.._. ___._ -- — _
Vegetative DiversiVIIntegrity
Community I Weighted
Individual Highest Average , Average
Cowardin
Circular last Wetland Community, Wetland Wetland Wetland
Wetland Name Location Classfflcation 39 Community Proportion Rating Rating I Rating Rating
Onsite Wetland(whole basin) 27-118-23-26-001 PEM1Cd Type 3 Shalow Marsh 90 0.5 0.50 0.30 0.46
._ Low Moderate
Moderate
_ � '
_ — a
PEMBd r Type 2 'Fresh(Wet)—Meadow- - 10 0.1 0.50 0.30 0.46
Moderate Low Moderate
!_ 100 ( . 0.50 # 0.30 0.46 L✓
Q Denotes incomplete calculation data
I
Wednesday,June 20,2012 Page 1 of 1
MnRAM: Site Response Record
' For Wetland:North Impact Area
Location: 27-118-23-26-001
' North Impact Area
Plant Community: Shallow Marsh Adjacent area slope
Cowardin Classification: Circular 39: 26-A Gentle 100% Groundwater-speco is questions
PEMCd Type 3 26_B Moderate 0% S8 Wetland soils Recharge
26-C Steep 0% 59 Subwatershed land use Discharge
4 Listed,rare,speclal species? No 60 Wetland size/soil group Recharge
S Rare community or habitat? No - 61 Wetland hydroperiod Recharge
Inlet/Outlet conflguration Discharge
6 Pre-European-settlement condition? N 27 Downstream sens./WQ protect A 62
o = 63 Upland topo relief Discharge
28 Nutrient loading B
Hydrogeomorphol ogy/topography:
' 7 Depressional/Tributary --- Additional information
29 Shoreline wetland? No 64 Restoration potential No
8-1 Maximum water depth 12 inches Shoreline Weiland _
8_2 %inundated 70% 6$ LO affected by restoration
30 Rootedveg.,%cover 0%
' 9 Immediate drainage--local WS 20 acres 31 Wetland in-water width F 0 feet 66 Existing size 0.36
64
10 Esimated sizelexisting site: (see#66) 32 Emerg.veg.erosion resistance C Restorable size I 7-
4—
' t/-Upland Soil L22C2-Lester loam
33 Erosion potential ofsi[e Potential new wetland ` 7.64
- 1l-Wetland Soil L24A-Glencoe loam 34 Upslope veg.lbank protection 67 Average width of pot.buffer 0 feet
35 Rare wildiife? No 68 Ease of potential restoration
36 Scare/Rare/SI/S2 community No 69 Hydrologic alterations 0
37 Yegetative cover C 70 Potential wetland type 0
38 Yeg.community intersposlon NA 71 Stormwater sensitivity B
12 Oudet for flood control B
39 Welland detritus C 72 Additional treatment needs B
' 13 Oulle(for hydro regime _B
40 Interspersion on landscape L
14 Dominant upland land use B B Watershed Mississippi(Metro)
41 Wildlife barriers
' 15 Welland soil condition B WS# 20 Service Area: 7
' 16 Yegetation(%cover) 1000/0
Amphibian-breeding potential For functional ratings,please run the
17 Emerg.vegflood resistance c ! Summa tab report.
42 Hydropertod adequacy Adequate Summary �
18 Sediment delivery 93 Fish presence A This report printed on: 6120/2012
19 Upland soils(soil group) B
=—I 44 Overwintering habitat C
20 Stormwater runoff C
45 Wildlife species(list)
Z1 Subwatershed wetland density B
' 22 Channels/sheelflow C 46 Fish habitat quality C
47 Fish species(list)
23 Ai#acent buffer width - 5 feet j
48 Unique/rare opportunity No J
t Adjacent area management 49 Wetland visibility C
24-A Full 10%
-- SO Proximity to population No 1
24-B Manicured 90%1
24-C Bare 0% -
51 Public ownership
-- 52 Public access
Adjacent area diversity/structure_ S3 Human influence on wetland
2S-A
Native 10 0,f S4 Human influence an viewshed _J
25-B Mired9U%II SS Spatial brffer C
25-C Sparse _0�0 S6 Recreational activity potential C
._.........
' 57 Commercial crop--hydro Impact NA
• �i es ci
ao S s u O
C
_j o: a
- -
� 3 K-4 y o 0 1y
Iv.
' Y
CE
d t
33 c ° a
39
ci
z
CL
r a
F �
Ab 1j
I b 3
' 51 NO
as
v
It
nAS
S
W l-
a Lu
n
p ti�t O y Oqq
pnp �
ci
O N
ca
ft
4 N
ti a
MnRAM: Site Response Record
For Wetland:South Impact Area
Location: 27-118-23-26-001
' South Impact Area
Plant Community: Shallow Marsh'
Ar(j'acent area slope 57 Commercial crop—hydro impact LN
Cowardln Classification: Circular 39: 26A Gentle 1o0%
PEM1Cd Type 3 Groundwater-speciflcquestions
26-B Moderate 0%
Plant Community: Fresh(Wet)Meadow S8 Wetland soils Recharge
' Cowardin Classification: Circular 39: 26-C Steep 0%
,ffi' Subwatershed land use Discharge
PEMBd Type 2 60 Wetland size/soil group Recharge
4 Listed rare,special species? 27 Downstream No 61 Wetland hydroperiod Recharge
sens.IJY Q protect. A
62 InlellOudet configuration Discharge
5 Rare community or habitat? No 18 Nutrient loading B 63 Upland topo relief Discharge
6 Pre-European-settlement condition? No
Hydrogeomorphology/topography: 29 Shoreline wetland? No Additional information
7 Depressionairrributary Shoreline Wetland 64 Restoration potential N
8-1 Maximum water depth 12 Inches 30 Rooted veg.,%cover 0% 65 LO affected by restoration
8-2 %inundated 60% 31 Wetland in-water width 0 feet
Eme v erosion resistance 66 Bzislingsize 0.12
9 Immediate drainage—loco!WS 20 acres 32 rg•veg.
33 Erosion potentia!ofsite
Restorable size 7.88
10 Eslmated slze%xisting site: (see 1166) Potential new wetland 7.88 i
34 Upslope veg./bank protection ----�
' 11-Upland Soil L22C2-Lester loam 35 Rare wildlire? No 67 Average width of pot.buffer 0 feet
1l-Wetland Soil L24A-Glencoe loam 36 Scare/Rare&142 community No 68 Ease ofpolemial restoration
37 Vegetative cover C 69 Hydrologic alterations 0
38 Veg.community interspersion L C 70 Potential wetland type 0
39 Wetland detrllus 1= 71 Stormwatersensitivity B
12 Outlet for flood control B ! 40 Interspersion on landscape r A 72 Additional treatment needs B
f 3 Oudet for hydro regime B 41 Wildlife barriers �B Watershed Mississippi(Metro)
14 Dominant upland land use _B WS# 20 Service Area. 7
15 Wetland soil condition B I Amphlbian-breeding potential
16 Vegetation(S:cover) 90% 42 llydropertod adequacy Adequate For functional ratings,please run the
Summary tab report.
43 Fish presence FA 17 Emerg•ve g.l!ood resistance C� This report printed on: 6!20/2012
18 Sediment delivery B 44 Overwintering habitat
�----J
19 Upland soils(soil group) 45 Wildlife species(list)
20 Stormwater runoff C 46 Fish habitat quality C
11 Subwatershed wetland density _B 47 Fish species(list)
22 Channels/sheeiflow
48 Unique/rare opportunity No
23 Adjacent buffer width 10 feet , 49 Welland visibility C 1
Adjacent area management 50 Prarimity to population No J
24-A Full 10% 51 Public ownership C
24-B Manicured 90%_1 S2 Public access C�
24-C Bare 0% S3 Human influence on wetland B-1
' Adjacent area diversity/structure 54 Human influence on viewshed B
25-A Native 10% SS Spatial buffer C
2S-B Mtred 90% S6 Recreational activity potential C
25-C Sparse 0% --
Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Maintenance Maintenance
Of Flood/ Downstream ofWedand
Hydrologic Stormwater/ Water Water Shoreline
Wetland Name Hydrogeoniorphology Regime Attenuation Quality Quaft Protection
South Impact Area Deeralle slondbutary(outlet but no perennial inlet or drainage entering from upstream 0.63 0.44 0.53 0.54 O.DO
Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Not Applicable
Additional IIyormae9r�
Maintenance of Maintenance of AesyhatW Wetland Sensldvity Additional
Characterisyle Mulntenanceof Characteristic Recreation/ Ground- Wetland toStorm water Stermwater
W110fe Habitat Characteristic Amphlbian Education/ Water Restoration and Urban Treatment
Wetland Name Structure Fish Habitat Habitat Cultural Commercial Uses Interaction Potendal Development Needs
South Impact 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 Applicable Not Applicable Moderate Moderate
Wetland Community Summary -_---
Vegetadve Diversity/Integrity
Community ! Weighted
Individual Highest Average Average
Cowardin Circular Plant Wetland Community Wetland Wetland Wetland
Wetland Name Locadon Classification! 39 Community Proportion Rating Rating Rating Rating
South Impact Area 27-118-23-26-001 L PEM1Cd Type 3 IShallow Marsh 70 0.5 0.50 0.30 0.38
PEMSd
Moderate Low Moderate
Type 2 Fresh(Wet)Meadow � 30 0.1 0.50 � 0.30 0.38
Moderate Low Moderate
100 I D.50: 0.38 ❑
Q Denotes incomplete calculation data.
Wednesday,June 20,2012 Page 1 of 1
1 Appendix D
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Buffer Vegetation Management Plan
Spring Hill Golf Club
Orono, Minnesota
The goal for the Buffer Vegetation Management Plan is to establish three areas
of native buffer along the edges of the fill areas on the 13th hole. The site
preparation, invasive species control methods and monitoring/reporting
requirements are outlined below.
Wetland Buffer Planting Plan
i
I. Site Preparation
A. Site Preparation shall consist of the following:
L Preparation of the seedbed in a manner that prepares
the project site for seed. After final grading has been
' completed, the site will be cultivated with a light disking
and dragging so that the surface is relatively level, flat
and not overly compacted.
ii. Install seed according to specifications after seedbed is
prepared.
II. Seed Specifications
A. Use native seed: fresh, clean, dry new-crop seed complying with
the Association of Official Seed Analysts' "Rules for Testing Seeds"
for purity and germination tolerances.
B. Seed mixes shall be blended by the Contractor using the specified
species and ratios as per BWSR Mix 35-641 in the upland buffer
(seed specs attached). Seed mix species and ratios shall be
guaranteed by the contractor to be true to specifications as
required. The contractor shall supply and plant native seed as pure
' live seed (PLS). See planting plan for planting schedule. All seed
shall have the proper stratification and/or scarification to break
dormancy for spring planting. No treatment required for seed used
in summer and fall plantings.
C. Seed source shall be from an approved/licensed nursery that will
be required to specify the origin of the seed used at the site.
III. Seeding Protocol (includes Wetland and Upland Buffer Areas)
A. Fall seeding shall occur between mid October and mid November.
' Spring seeding shall occur between May 1 and June 15. Seed may
be hand-broadcast or planted using a properly calibrated seed drill
over the site at the rates and with the species mix identified. After
Vegetation Management Plan
Spring Hill Golf Club
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 2 of 4
' seeding, the site will be dragged and cultipacked per seed
supplier's specifications to ensure good seed to soil contact.
' IV. Cover Crop
A. Oats or winter wheat should be used as specified in BWSR seed
mixes.
35-641 Mesic Prairie Southeast
' Common Name Scientific Name Rate Rate %of Mix Seeds/
(kg/ha) (lblac) (%by wt) sq ft
big bluestem Androo on gerardii 1.01 0.90 7.49% 3.30
' side-oats grams Bouteloue curb endula 1.54 1.37 11.38% 3.01
nodding wild rye EI mus canadensis 1.18 1 1.05 8.77% 2.01
slender wheatgrass EI mus trach caulus 1.01 0.90 7.50% 2.28
switchgrass Panicum vi atum 0.24 0.21 1.78% 1.10
' little bluestem Schizach rium sco avium 1.42 1.27 10.59% 7.00
Indian grass Sor hastrum nutans 2.24 2.00 16.68% 8.82
Total Grasses 8.63 7.70 64.19% 27.52
butterfly milkweed Asclepias tuberosa 0.07 1 0.06 0.53% 1 0.10
whorled milkweed Asclepias verUcillata 0.01 0.01 0.10% 0.05
Canada milk vetch Astragalus canadensis 0.18 0.16 1.33°x6 1.00
partridge pea Chamaecrista fasciculata 0.67 0.60 5.00% 0.60
' white prairie clover Dalea candida 0.01 0.01 0.07% 0.06
purple prairie clover Dales purpurea 0.10 0.09 0.76% 0.50
Canada tick trefoil Desmodium canadense 0.17 0.15 1.24% 0.30
ox-eye Hello sis heliantholdes 0.06 0.05 0.43% 0.12
'
rough blazing star Liatris aspera 0.03 0.03 0.21% 0.15
great blazing star Liatris pyonostachya 0.03 0.03 0.29% 0.14
wild bergamot Monarda fistulosa 0.01 0.01 0.06% 0.18
' stiff aoldenrod Ofi oneuron ri idum 0.02 0.02 0.17% 0.31
gray-headed coneflower Rafibida pinnate 0.02 0.02 0.15% 0.20
black-eyed susan Rudbeckis hirta 0.06 0.05 0.38% 1.54
heath aster S m h otdchum ericoides 0.01 0.01 0.05% 0.40
smooth aster S m h otrichum laeve 0.06 0.05 0.41% 1.00
bracted s iderwort Tradescantia bracteata 0.04 0.04 0.34% 0.15
blue vervain Verbena hastata 0.04 0.04 0.37% 1.50
hoary vervain Verbena stricta 0.11 0.10 0.85% 1.05
' olden alexanders Zizia aurea 0.08 0.07 0.60% 0.29
Total Forbs 1.79 1.60 13.34% 9.64
Oats or winter wheat(see note at
beginning of fist for
' recommended dates) 3.03 2.70 22.47% 1.20
Total Cover Crop 3.03 2.70 22.47% 1.20
Totals: 1 13.45 1 12.00 100.000/6 38.36
Purpose: Regional mesic prairie reconstruction for wetland mitigation,ecological
' restoration or conservation program planUngs.
Planting Area: Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province excluding Hardwood Hills subsection.
MnIDOT Districts Metro&6.
t
Vegetation Management Plan
Spring Hill Golf Club
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 3 of 4
Wetland Buffer Maintenance Plan
I. Maintenance
' A. The adjacent natural wetland is dominated by reed canary grass
and narrow-leaf cattail. The maintenance practices below will give
the native species a good chance to become established but it
cannot prevent invasion by the adjacent non-native species.
B. Year One (first full growing season after construction/planting):
Mow, using a flail type mower, to a height of 5 to 8 inches, just over
' the height of the emerging native plants before weeds go to seed.
Assume three mowings in the first season during the period of June
- September. Any areas within the wetland or upland buffer that
' have bare soils may be overseeded with appropriate seed if
deemed appropriate to promote native vegetation establishment.
C. Year Two: Spot mow and spray invasive weed species as
necessary. Any areas within the wetland or upland buffer that have
bare soils may be overseeded with appropriate seed if deemed
appropriate to promote native vegetation establishment.
D. Year Three: Spot mow and spray invasive weed species as
necessary.
E. Year Four: Spot mow and spray invasive weed species as
necessary or conduct prescribed burn if conditions dictate.
F. Year Five: Spot mow and spray invasive weed species as
necessary.
Wetland Buffer Monitoring Plan
' I. Monitoring and Reporting
A. Annual monitoring will be conducted in accordance with MCWD
rules. Results of monitoring will dictate maintenance activities
which could differ from those specified below depending on
performance of the wetland and upland buffer. Bare soils devoid of
vegetation will be noted during monitoring activities so that
overseeding after the initial seeding can be considered if deemed
appropriate.
B. The applicant will submit an annual Wetland Buffer Inspection
Report by January 1 of each year for five years. The applicant may
submit a written request to cease annual monitoring by year three if
the wetland buffer is well established and approved by MCWD.
C. The annual Wetland Buffer Inspection Report shall include:
L Site Plan showing: location of permitted buffer area,
' areas of bare soil or erosion, areas of invasive
vegetation, and location and type of any encroachment
on the buffer.
Vegetation Management Plan
' Spring Hill Golf Club
Revised December 5, 2012
Page 4 of 4
ii. Color photos of the wetland buffer taken during the
growing season.
iii. Description of buffer vegetation including: a list of the
dominant plant species and their estimated percent
cover, and a comparison of the species present to the
approved planting/seeding plan.
iv. A written narrative that identifies the management
strategies that will be utilized during the upcoming
' growing season to manage invasive species, improve
percent vegetative cover and species diversity, and
mitigate any encroachments on the buffer.
D. Annual monitoring will conducted by a qualified wetland consultant
' contracted by the applicant. Bopray Environmental Services, LLC,
N7831 920t" Street, River Falls, Wisconsin, 54022.
' kibooray cdyahoo.com, 715-307-4577 will perform the annual
monitoring.
1 Appendix E
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
' Spring Hill Golf Club
Adjacent Land Owners
Name Number Street City State Zip Code
' Dean Reder 1065 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
Charles Pihl 1085 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
Chales Dunnavan 1099 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
' Sidney Brennan 1013 Ford Rd. Minnetonka MN 55305 +
Hamel Properties LLC 601 Carlson Pkwy#350 Minnetonka MN 55305
John Schuett 1205 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
Randal Baker 1255 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
GAS Ten LLC 601 Carlson Pkwy#350 Minnetonka MN 55305
Fortuna Property LLC 3470 Zircon Ln.N Plymouth MN 55447
' Seth Hoyt 1382 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
Ann Hofkin 1422 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
GM Knappenberger 1420 Tamarack Dr. Long Lake MN 55356
MaryAlshouse 1300 Willowbrook Dr. Wayzata MN 55391
' Robert Leeds 1275 Willowbrook Dr. Wayzata MN 55391
Debralin Hughes 1225 Willowbrook Dr. Wayzata MN 55391
Michael Setnicker 1175 Willowbrook Dr. Wayzata MN 55391
Youngki Kim 1180 Wyndmere Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
' Gary Gronneberg 1185 Wyndmere Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Back Hong 1165 Wyndmere Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Stephen Gill 1145 Wyndmere Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Kern Hoppe 47585 chapinwood Rd. Cable WI 54821
Lucia Delaney 1101 Willowbrook Dr. Wayzata MN 55391
Daniel Bolgar 700 Sixth Ave N. Wayzata MN 55391
Mark Strobel 525 Hunter Pass Wayzata MN 55391
William Schneider 465 Hunter Pass Wayzata MN 55391
Tonkawa Inc. 301 Carlson Pkwy Minnetonka MN 55305
Christopher Perry 1125 Hunter Dr. Wayzata MN 55391
' Douglas Dayton 300 Co.Rd.6 Wayzata MN 55391
Douglas Moechnig 345 Spring Hill Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Richard Nigon 445 Spring Hill Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Richard Zona 465 Spring Hill Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
' Mike Hahn 531 North Stream Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
David Pearce 591 North Stream Rd. Orono MN 55391
Van Zandt 625 Spring Hill Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Fredrick Winston 765 Spring Hill Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Joanne Pastel 951 Spring Hill Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Marney Brooks 1300 US Trust Bid.730 2nd Ave S. Minneapolis MN 55402
William Hite Jr. 1125 Spring Hill Rd. Wayzata MN 55391
Robert Fullerton 730 2nd Ave.S.#1300 Minneapolis MN 55402
White Oaks Homeowners Assoc. 1245 Co.Rd.6 Long Lake MN 55356
1 1Lmm poo SHY Ift liftiv di tel■• oa■•r mrumwl� BmUMIv Wu AM urlkm
TING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY, & EROSION CONTROL PLANS
FOR
SPRING HILL GOLF CLUB INDEX
725 COUNTY ROAD 6, WAYZATA, MN 55391
PHONE: (952) 476-4875 FAX: (952) 404-9827 TITLE SHEET
' SITE INFORMATION
,. . EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILS
-- - . WETLAND FILL & FAIRWAY RECONSTRUCTION
-GRADING, DRAINAGE, UTILITY, & EROSION CON
WETLAND CALCULATIONS
LEGEND
s o'� • �� —•—•—•—•—•—•—REtI./1JDDEIkFAl10k
' T UUIUND DFIAFAIUM
x��;.,
EIDSINIO BPoD6f
DOSTO STM
DEC 112012 -�--�-> SE
EIDSTING COMM
X980.0 EICSIM SPOT EiEVA
�.d • • Received by MEE/fRE LW
AETL"
FA Y /:
m � j
E7051RlO FNRRAY/OR
ON
DGSIR7C TERM BUFFER AREA
.. 1 fL�JI"+/. : I"a!/II';.A 11�`•i/11�/j l('Il ll�OII
Q 4 t o.' { •.6 \ �1.U�);d�<��6 1��i(h4<�?M��d�r N CARON AREA
ENSTM O
FT wwmf-m lEfUg 11- E5
PROPOSED APPRDW
fes
111-IF S ff .ii b }y.
, a r
PROPOSED DORM
PROI'm la PW
v —'—*—•—`—*—� -PRIOR TO CONSTRLK
• • a. v:�x�saewwtae,...arroa>• wex-w.c+a�...� PROPOSED HEAVY-00
_ SLT FENCE-plm TC
PROPOSED KET PRO
5 i -PRIOR 10 CORSTRU(
PROPOSED CAMOORY
EROSION CONTROL BL
PROPOSED ROCK CON
ENTFANCE-PRNIR TO
.
MEE
;%.% PROPOSED KIMD 1
;:;'•, AREA-RERAWBEAT
PROJECT CONTACTS
---N..- v11DT NIA NITAAI r 0 G _ IAIICG D W°I lull /GR71_gD/1-n1161 IAN „-
VI
_ , �•� '_., 5 a•',. r ,i a._ :� r 1 y" -. ` � ''R'x= ems. IN \\•• `,` � i P.r I �;,�. -_
SOILS-," '
!
�1 i' w yR:.. t I ��'P', r*'•, �_,.' -�J •»edi.• -4s ,"t. .: 0 to• x - ,Z
J
1 i�ti f''•' + 7 •:� .,e_: t< ..� si.�i�• �f +ItVJ7- - r -`\ / r t l!'1,, :/ /
, . _yam 1_- __.. � :, ',....: s::' ,/�. i' •� •--' .. � _ y :, 5 �\\ l 'i �' r r '
II �q�
jj. - ""''°.: 'i.. M X v-. asi" ' r '1 �� I.t( 11. : `..1 I ' /s• ! 'rt �i�(i
�(t- H i I,dr qi:7' • ,�,%�L`�'�•Y-'i"'T \ -ami- _•...; • .�». t� —j7 ..� `
1i S
wit a�.f `\
`. ,,
;,: `�•"A;. 7 r.... ]� - S �.'+ `��. -� S�,f ,' ,•' ._.Zi ,'r/ f \,`•. D S .,,�.�.
OILS1
'�'` ;:.aa •`� a � _'k..m• ;.,� ., fir+ ,� r'. � j - M 2 - - , \t i _ .\\� /` - �J � l ^.
f
�"` , f t `� � A a�i J. t rf �,,, ry:a„� t E• ,_t 'r' 1 �• .� I d � :\
r, 4 G1y�,, .Q; v i �s '�•� irr I 't �• �: 1t�`t\ .. ,\ - �i„5'�. \ � 1 1!•�,
j I L✓
*`'I°` R. � ,., If �.I'� � �� w� !f � :-v 7--� �`.'\-.. S# �-�r} _� - � y� `�•• `'r 11 i1 J/'rr(,�� jj � _- s; �' 't ,�, v
If
77-
# 1
ME
ME
t" � _ It r'!. }- :/�i:at� / , '�/-= 'x• err.'��+!•i!}�
i y
1,6/D SOILS-..
x' t ,�ERI1lO _�'"7"' �+ ,;�•7.�i t ..tr. `tie'- � , 1 r =i f \ �/ - a��,', ' � n,
yLaut
OCATIO �,-
T 1
• k • t.'y�,€ ',int' � i '' ,. ��� �• ,AND, FI�L .�,c _ WA1��- __
-
F 1R LS _
1 , +.! rs. 0:..�_ ..P 0 - _ 1 1 f 7 1 1 » k - �4 -... /'•`''i� 7>••�- 4a.- �-}, -...
'p,.' t c (�- .. 1�'..j 4 .-..� :•�•' S t ,:a f 5, `! , _ �
SOI
,
•./j 1 ( � p I :< `• i f 5 -�T � 1., t }-wa '-.� ), is t � t. I I ;'� r �y _�.
''+' l •. I �t.` 4�'� :r �:, 1_' � _ �. t,;.'! ! :.-s tea- ti a '�; II•' � � F :1••___~�
'L '•J,,, _.W-
� '/ 5� � 1,5 - �,. � .;.�. r �� - f �1 1 /r\il 'I t i�(r , tr• g�` - /r/.
y y -.- � %?x'41 _ f .ie{ fy: {�J .';1� !,f r g� �: il� i I((.,rr �•t l\ 1
ti
i : ,_ry �, 7f� R/ ' < •, :c� ,
f 1 -.
' • r. r. ._+.. ! i:l���l t lir _ ; I I,
1lIlw1O 4 P , +y ,i„ t ti. c •EI"!-. , _, PEYC
_ I
shs + F i1N�L - \ w , - + r�,i, • D SOILS
nr !! { �{{",-,y r,.r C;: _` 7 `'• '�1 t' a c? f .t4 �' -Y'', ■ \� } t r ,'i',-.t�`i
''' - x S•a ,11' i ,3 • e ?.w '_;,��, .. L{I r'S;` - 1 • / �' .. 7 '!` -�„` �fkWr 2 ' 1'(li'`;�'
WR PIICI[Clm'q r �, as } 1 3 f,,,r , j,,'..; .:! �1 f n` - - -`'/ ,:\• WOMEN"
��
6/D SOILS
"'�•ur. y;,�) �/j Y�•y��,;.i 'ti, i f ,"�'`y�t y�1a` ��,s��c�''�"" � "_if rt` .�r�� - k"�` �1" i��a A t� i.�; ,'+ yi� ` Q 1
z;A .,.x-��� t .:'i rx \' - I �` � •+7'+' � '..J I ', i 5.:." ,1� ?�`i -}'; l,�,l - I � �5_' 't[`.,=.�' �.71�'- �:. � �'•i.:d':�1cn
}� F Yipa-Ismt'}. ! %f'"' , I - j '\,' � � .i +�I.� •{ _'e IV
,>•* � .�. • -r�J l,� 5 1.,a'� ",� �� 1 �r'�' 1 r���' -,i r J i � \•, 3 �S 5## +_tom
.��' /�, ,� i •��"` �. "'',� �.� ;;yam �•. �� � .,+'" � ,�. l,b�i•>�� ;� Y..��, �, l �S
SOL r ?P5
y f
n` :"" �, [''- '(��` I PL:.' f {��E � '.f` f,,!,. ::�, �� _ -�j ti Y J tI,,.R /yam.• `•P, ' (� u.c 5
4-... r..l .: 9-..i.cy�,:. , I 1 - ' T J h,. 1 I) :'1J' j I {S I r •i `, �i,'
.,15 T.Vii; • !r<I•l a>P•. .'y..- +y*`�z r�r'• 'tr .'!,i,. s.�4a ,4t,� ��} ?� ,,�; j;�, _.. \; 1 \\,` { !rr. `Ir 1 � ��_
j. }A -4N3 . :r.'.��-; fl'.' r.-'s t- j rl S, 1•t1 •��..:• •�,\ `'`Ir \., �'i.I���
�,f'1 "N• •. 'L/ j'�dyy-- #
E.
s .•''
9 r 9
woo
APRQX-Iff 984,
{{ ,f ; HWL1
S. 15 / a 1. 15B HWL,C
ctrl `, ;LN
`
IN
EOF
1 / fi r - 1:
9so. 15AA
77.22 - ,I ,' �; ` EOFi <' HWL, yR=977.23
977.46\ ' 980,,6 HWL10 yR =977.49
` oo =9778
977 76
HWL1
Q1 lrfe=0.06 CFS`
Q =1.70 CFS i' i . i Q� yR-0.08 CFS
,I 10 rt { -i r; '1' Q10 rt =1.43 CFS
Q =5.76 CFS '
100 . :Q1 3.52 CFS:, I
SING DRAINAGE MAP PROPOSED DRAINAGE MAP
1 Inch = 120 feet LEGEND 1 inch = 120 feet
DRAINAGE AREA
k '
9 13 s• f ��
• y F i•uo�!' �� yy � � 3
�rx !
Ila
Ila
1 l{•t #i a .!j¢1j e I i�# ,T'! @ 3i ;� _. s� j3'�P:;;
tj
ILL
� f1Af �tnjqi
1
#S '������ Ti iF � � zii 13�1�� � 8�6 ? ' �. � ��'$ � 3 � •��. sa s jsZj R14
SL
i � ; ; ! T �s � 3 •e � �• L
f� lo; j1 • } itF # .E� a y pis T ' % = TM4
'
! ite#i�a 7'i � ���j'� �a�1T 3`z! � �k:� �H�$ ¢ �� f ��e � 7� ; .� gg :$ C� ��-iE�;d'� E '•".
: s3 Ay $ e4
61,
' ll''s
Ii S
� a
_ .t 0
1 , t. t a `, , ;► �.:.
t a i
Nil �IiIM !n M 0.1i1i 1�19i qoa i illl iilq�le `�
jp
�# � !� �I= � '�r�� T' s F� � r �1. �n�� u�•i� ,"�� �i , i �9� �i( 'g� a�
AZ
19
F t
�aj
1,S'[y �I! {{ f ft, i` ::: � .e$a5:A 8*9 pilt I �� $r � s
+■ s �r • 7 s
pill,
z r
g gg g$ aes fig°gg@
$� g� R•R E a�pk kE@fill
�n � o � C 3 bit
",_ _Kra.. :!.
'... _ N � ! I _ �� •!. It Xao ' � \ �\ °'���3 �D'-����—i
-M now
CN
)<
1.10
-4
ee- Ji
4 4 4
1 41
Ar
Ap
4 J 4 4 X
7 1_41 -1 -1 14 -1 ��''%
-41 �j 41
-j 4 4 at -4 4 4
-41 0 _qj
.31
11 �i All'
JI
U0 w
44
L
4 La W 4
U
J /
-1 4M zz—
Mlev;b
L.J La -4
ui
0§0 0
z wi
J -41
-_IQ IM 3:
IIz 0 M4
-4 4
OJ 3
Iqj1 1` /`` /
0
CL
'41
2i
W,
4
-41
mx
0 to
—————— -------
ED
r \ 9
974.52 .
•�\�\ V 1 I l t L \ \ \ , _ _l_ - _.souM MEnl�Ya rf f�! � �' � ;� v9 _
\ rA9Es 4219
-LAND #15B8 \ \ \ 1'003.4 .- FU �
R H -17��Q ml
J
\ _ __ ' - __ �\ •�.... ` _5 rte' _ _
j � 4
y, -
_ � ✓ �/ \ / _._ _ -_ ._�_ +� Ct$"" .i- bx�ssi S., t } ��
// �_ e>.\ .��• �.�, \ II i.�/ ' /� _ -- - - �.K,a:.n "` ��� yl�cTt�. � '�1 y�t.�.'i-r�/�I'!il%#�'- V 976>, 3 �rt .> ,�l\ � . .' _
(
1 \ \ 930
t ,l -\ �C� \�~ r _ - •� $ t3;�''� ' �'�� �` � �z� I it /f/�� �: � � t:;` ,'if\;� 3 �\\ �,�\\ `.
\I I ISI � I�I� t � �.;a = 3 iii �, I>;' 1'r' `. .• ,7, tiF \ J, / r 9ei
•' ' , � �I I -_ r � Y f � � � Y v r e r�/�� �\ `�yW� __fix , f � _ j>" /` I k
\ 4
11L 11L ! ,. f �.i- _
-
+. � i. I; x nl^� � ann rt F II -�'. tC \\;\��•!c.;, �`�' ,'`:`�,+ �' ,F
\ ' 1 r Ih:II i'i, I '� ;t: I�h./`:I' F t' t,I 1� \�;\ n rli° \` `; / ' t l f/ -,•�t' -
; ! ♦ r<. ; ..•, \\ t.\ .� \lll/L .'s g�ce e .n.. ��� j � »✓;:n]-.._ _
{S;\X\i\ :\7:7 Lt r \ 1�,._3 II hi k •i! Ii\ �\ ''� - - - �'�_ �' ,c�'''I \�\ `� '\,,.`` -w- -'a_ ;jiA''.f.yrk' \i\� '� % .r `T`�u _ - _
,6.. � 4' � II I,•.}."� .. tll .. /.. f. `( .'�. � „�Jd �\.� JIL SIL SIL ��t�f � \\.� 'j i--i r\ \�\ $� ��
��i '4:.\`!\\ y, \ /' _.,\ .a,c'�. ` \ \ \` `�♦ ..-.. `_ �lllli _NWL/L \LLL -1UW-
` \ \\ \♦ \
qtr_ _d,_ _d,_ SIL )i \ -
� �'4 F \ \ it � L....i��� - , , '• gp, -1-
41n L/L _LWW_ -milk-_ 4_4/L _161L \W/L
-Y_ L.V ��L.VvI-Q'-
JIL JIL 1L JIL 11L 11L _ILL -1 1tL JIL -AIL. SIL
�\ -Ili-
TOTAL
1L
TOTAL WETLAND FILL' \
b'('
f
XACW/L -\W \W/ --\-4L/- 4\W< xW/L 1W_-L 30WJORTH - 12,950 SF 0. ETLAD18Ak
!� J,
\ w_ .Y_ SOUTH - 5.29 d_ DNR PROTECTED WETLAND-837W,- _u,_ ..%u \T,�'oral\\ul I \o `` y •"?' ,
11L 18.249 SF 0.42 AC. 11L 11L \\r
OHW 976 7 -'ONONAL O00' ;JI �
�►'�\�::,� 100 YR HWL-977.84 -\ cv- +-ur.-\�-\ ,,`:\`�•• �:; � !/
/ / / W/ W/ / / Ilt/ I / W/ 28,435 SF 9.91 AO) a; vl. \\r�i�i\a Ih• X r..�
_sWL -alt!/ - -aUll4 aL_� �1._.� �1.41.e- -\11v� -1_.� all!>� �ll�L�- a1_� �111� -��- /{ q% 11 v \�
:,•\ 977.0 - �\ \,.w. 0 \1_00\. .`\\\. I
_d,_ _V,_ __ �Y_ __ �V_ _V,_ r.� J. 982.3
`` .♦ .t-. NWX _dL _d,_ jU_ \II`\/r.� h~.Y,-'an�l' N�Itdl,�l Tr�l�?rlla�� \_.,. - /• - 1
11L 11L 11L 11L 1 11L
� 11L \ \ MOTE THE OHW 9767 ELEVATION IS' -.a ,���:,;u�lkar,�•\,r,? v ,\.,
��ll!/L �U!!/L NON EXISTENT IN ALL PROPOSED -�1u,L
Lal;\ren�d/`I \�i��l ����ia\r7�r••ru
.a�i1L \�L $rl r \+. � '• /� +'-+- / /
\ \ k ;\•;� ►` CONSTRUCTION AREAS. THEREFORE
ro),'
uNO CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR AT OR ,,\;S4,;=1N/c, +A BELOW THE OHW 976.7 ELEVATION. 11L 1 a .I , / L
DElJWAT ,�.
''•` -__-• _^ \W IL \111/L wW/L \ll// SWI \11Li� 4\4L/k-4\4L/k- W/L All
-' -'Y- W _0_ TE1lANO o �/U..I��I�iri�t
'- " - _ \"a\,. J.• EM-0M MAL- $1� °
-- \�. _� `,•JIL JIL 1L 1L 1
111, OOIi COIl95E 11L ',.J,r••.\\G \\.J`/.,1\.'.t il.;ct>\/ ,�1'�` yL / ,./ / /
. - ._---- - .. -_. - .lam r y ��, '••�. CONSTRUCTION-W97
_ --- -�-�-� _....______f• � ;-l�l_A.A\\q �nc. �`. \`.\ / ,i /
_. .- - - -- -- ._ ��' \\ \` ,y� .�1+9J9X0
U d d V I
-----_.. •------ _v -�f 987 8 ''. 81\$ ��\K1• - -
v,�
.T. // ( :. X 1 ~"^•,. ,� '�' Y;,,,, 31111.6- .L 9ELWATIO -awuu ff r I l
/ -NAW \lu/L L ,pr, J.-U WNIIONIQITAL-2011 2
r � ';�\..�. /201 /'
\ (l ` �, 11L 11L JIL 11L I,; k \ \,, `,
1 991.2 ? �� \ i \':`�:�.>�
1 ( 992.7 I t \ '\ `` \'' .. ``, I 98
990.9 \ \ I 1 \� ,\ IL
I I I X
,
- -......._ C
I f \ _luy_ / f r984.6' y 983.1 I \ J
it i
\ 9 (1 l -'- - QR({R
89
�opray Memorandum
' Environmental
' N7e51 y2oth5t.Ki.,r-il..wl3+o22
(7 13)-+23-8969 k�hoPray@yahoo.com
To: Catherine Bach, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
From: Kelly Bopray, PSS, CWD
' Subject: Spring Hill Golf Club, Wetland Permit Application
Date: January 4, 2013
' Catherine,
This is just a quick note to provide the additional information you requested in your January 3,
2012 email.
Per item 1. i.e. Playability and safety. In the application we did not specifically site safety
issues related to the proposed project. We generally referenced playability and safety as we
believe they go hand in hand as related to the issues that will be addressed by the proposed
changes to the 13th fairway. Specific examples would include the fact that where a hazard
' consistently slows or stops the progress of play, it causes a bottleneck and increases the risk of
trailing players playing into the area where the proceeding player are. When a ball is advanced
near the wetland hazard on the 13th fairway, the players have to backtrack into the path of the
following groups play in order to access the
cart-way and bridge that crosses the
wetland. There is also a real safety
concern in that players may be tempted to MR
try to retrieve errant balls from the wetland
and this not only further slows the pace of
play, but also presents a trip/fall hazard for
the individual player. Another safety -
' concern arises at the bridge that is the only
current means to get past the wetland
hazard. The bridge is subject to frost
heaving and settling which presents a
challenge for both golf carts and
' maintenance equipment to cross (see
picture).
R
E)opray Memorandum
' Environmental
Nle 31 9zot6 St.Ki„cr F,IIa,w 3+ n
(713),m-8969 kj6.p—!1oyaboo.—m
' Per item 2. i.e. Permit application timing. Spring Hill Golf Club has requested the permit
approval at this time because we understand the issues involved are complicated and
' dependent on a number of factors which could result in delaying or missing the optimum window
to complete the project. The grading needs to be completed in the fall, but early enough for
"grow in" of the grass to be optimal. Spring Hill Golf Club will need to identify and select a
' contractor to do the work per the detailed specification. There are also some issues such as
final wetland boundary approval, and 1997 mitigation vegetation and hydrology documentation
that cannot be completed until the 2013 growing season. If the permitting process was delayed
until the summer of 2013, it could jeopardize completing the project in the fall of 2013.
If you have any questions please give me a call at 715-307-4577.
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
QUALITY OF WATER QUALITY OF LIFE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tim Johnson,Spring Hill Golf Club
FROM: Catherine Bach,Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
' DA'L'E: November 26,2012
RE: WCA Application#W 12-34. Spring Hill Golf Club, Orono
' servation Act WCA Technical Evaluation Panel TEP meetin was held on
A Wetland Con (WCA) (TEP) g
November 15,2012 at the MCWD office to review revised submittals for the above mentioned
replacement plan application for Spring Hill Golf Club in Orono. TEP members present
included Catherine Bach(MCWD/LGU),Lynda Peterson(BWSR),and Stacey Lijewski
(Hennepin SWCD).
' The TEP raised concerns with the proposed on-site wetland creation. Due to current site
conditions,it is likely that the Ecological Suitability&Sustainability criteria outlined in Chapter
' 8420.0522 Subp.5 would be very difficult to meet through the proposed on-site wetland
creation. The proposed wetland creation is adjacent to a larger wetland basin dominated by
narrow-leaved/hybrid cattail and reed canary grass. In order to prevent these invasive species
from dominating the created wetland there would likely need to be significant vegetation
management in the larger adjacent basin in addition to the creation area. Furthermore,a large
portion of the adjacent wetland is DNR Public Water Wetland#837W,which may complicate
any vegetation management throughout the larger adjacent basin,
' Because of the TEP's concerns with the proposed on-site wetland creation and lack of other
opportunities for replacement credit,the TEP recommends that all wetland replacement
' requirements for the proposed project be met through the purchasing of banked credits from
Account No. 1410(Michael and Melanie DeLuca),which was Indicated-as a possibility during
the meeting. The current proposal is to purchase a portion of the total required replacement
' credit from this account and obtain the remaining required replacement credit through on-site
wetland creation.
' It is important to note that the application is currently incomplete,and the remaining items from
the incomplete letter dated September 11,2012 that were discussed at the November 15,2012
TEP meeting must still be submitted before the application is deemed complete(e.g.
' documentation confirming compliance with the 1997 WCA replacement plan). A revised
incomplete letter following the discussion at the meeting will be provided.
' I concur in the above-stated findings and recommendation;
G&*Olu' 11/27/12
' Catherine Bach,Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Date
WCA Local Government Unit
v
Lynda Peterson,Board of Water&Soil Resources Date
z 0
Stacey(Yewski,Uiennepin Conservation District Date
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club Northeast Arm of Wetland 15
Orono, Minnesota
Prepared for: Spring Hill Golf Club
1
j.
i1 f 1
k;
t.y
0_ :
k
May 22, 2013
r
f!)opracJ,
r„nvironmental
We 1 9zoth 5t.Rncrrail-,WI 3+ Zz
713)+23 A969 kj6,prago!phn —.
BES Project No. 2012.029
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club Northeast Arm of Wetland 15
Orono, Minnesota
May 22, 2013
Background
Bopray Environmental Services LLC (BES) has completed a wetland delineation on the
northeast arm of Wetland 15 on the Spring Hill Golf Course located in the SE1/4, of Section 26,
T1 18N, R23W, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Figure 1). The site is drainage swale/wetlands
that cuts across the golf course. The topography of the site is strongly rolling according to the
U.S.G.S. quadrangle topographic map (Figure 2). On May 13, 2013 BES completed a
delineated of Northeast Arm of Wetland 15. The wetland boundaries are shown on an aerial
photo in Figure 3. The surveyed wetland boundaries are provided by James R. Hill in
Appendix A. The purpose of this delineation was to extend a previous delineation by Graham
Environmental Services to cover all of Wetland 15 within the golf course property as required by
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Precipitation % Normal
Methodologies Apr 01-May 14,2013
Fj
The site was evaluated for wetlands based on
the methods contained in the Level 2, ti '
"Routine Determinations" section of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers "Wetland
Delineation Manual" (Technical Report Y87-1, _
1987) and the Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Midwest Region. This is the r
methodology currently used to determine
wetlands by both the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers for implementation of Section 404
so
of the Clean Water Act and by the Minnesota eroent
Wetland Conservation Act. Soil colors
described herein follow"Munsell Soil color
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club,Orono, MN
BES Project No. 2012-029
May 22,2013
Charts". According to the Climatology Working Groups' webpage, the area was at 110-150% of
normal year to date precipitation at the time of the site visit.
Results
Wetland 15 Northeast Arm
This wetland is located off the northeast corner of Wetland 15 which was previously delineated
by GES in 2011 and 2012. The northeast arm extend east across the golf club property and on
to the adjacent residential lots. This wetland is the Palustrine, Emergent, Seasonally flooded
(PEMC) shallow marsh swale/wetland. The sample transect was done between fairways to
document the"normal" conditions without the influence of the fairway maintenance. Wetland 15
is dominated by cattails (Typha sp.) and reed canary grass (Pha/aris arundinacea). Soils in the
wetland consisted of eight inches of N 2/0 loam, over eight inches of N 2/0 clay loam over 10YR
2/1 clay loam with 5% 10YR 4/4 iron concentrations (Al2). Surface water was present in the
wetland. Free water was observed within a depth of 12 inches in the soil pit and soil was
saturated to the surface at the time of the site visit. The wetland hydrology indicators observed
in the wetland included surface water(Al), high water table (A2), saturation (A3), Inundation on
aerial imagery (67), geomorphic position (D2) and a positive FAC-neutral test(D5). The
adjacent upland vegetation is dominated by Sugar maple (Acer saccharum), red maple (Acer
rubrum), common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), gooseberry current (Ribes cynosbati), red
cedar(Juniperus virginiana) and Virginia waterleaf(Parthenocissus quiquefolia). The upland
soils consisted of six inches of N 2/0 loam, over 10YR 2/1 clay loam. There was no free water
or saturated soil within a depth of 18 inches in the upland soil pit. The wetland boundary was
generally staked along the topographic and vegetation break.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (Figure 4) identifies wetlands at either end of the
northeast arm of Wetland 15, but does not identify the northeast arm itself as wetland. Based
on BES's field work Wetland A was classified as a Palustrine, Emergent, Seasonally Flooded,
(PEMC) wetland. The DNR Protected Waters Inventory map(Figure 5) identifies Wetland 15
as Protected Waters Wetland 837W which has an established Ordinary High Water(OHM
elevation of 976.7. Surveying for the 13th fairway reconstruction established that the OHW did
not extend into the northeast arm of Wetland 15. The Hennepin County Soils Survey (Figure 6)
shows the site is predominantly mapped as Lester loam (L22D2) and Glencoe loam,
depressional (1-24A). The Glencoe soil map unit is listed as a hydric soils map unit, whereas the
Lester soil map unit is listed as partially hydric.
2
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club,Orono, MN
BES Project No. 2012-029
May 22, 2013
Wetland Classification
BES' classification of the wetlands is based on observations of the site and is include in Table 1
below.
Table 1. Summary of Wetland Characteristics
Basin Class Circ. 39 Isolated Comments
Type Y/N
Wetland A Shallow marsh 3 N Wetland A is dominated by cattails and
(PEMC) reed canary grass.
Additional information regarding the wetland vegetation, soils and hydrology is included in
Appendix B. Ground level photos of the wetlands are included in Figures 7.
The information contained herein represents the findings of BES during wetland evaluation
activities conducted on May 13, 2013 at the referenced site.
Respectfully,
Bopray Environmental Services LLC
Kelly J. Bopray Date
Professional Soil Scientist
Certified Wetland Delineator
Enclosures
3
Mediae
Deer BA RC
Approximate auntaror
Site Location
s ,s
-6M A et jy Orono PI
W
2
'Atord Rt
tKe,�y
' Long Lake '
-- 12 - woyaata Ettvd W Old l
1
6 'A'
� 'nn f'F 1?13h-:nnr rnr m-rr Cupnrrhnr nnvr.r dv a:prhP.ls.Ab rgrtA r.ier,-d y�
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 1. Location Map
Spring Hill Golf Club
Orono, Minnesota
F)oPray
Project No. 2012.029
Environmental
y
e.
..E
i, a.._. _ f �� :.. Nf'�- r _�-��• �,�A �n•'' �� �t � --a r ,�� ODS
/� �O�, �;~7�1�r'�I�iW /067' �ti QfER `MILL .w..q, •' � ;.�:-X"
�) y •�IQ?Q �e. Y^ ,f Y,t
t '-
Approximate
Site Location
Ile T
Jl
�/1 K�.:�•� .� ,,,�nit� ��4C � �. i C� �" "'� tt t i ��....~c—„„� _ ^7'
F .. .f
y •
''`.• '. fir 1 0 .�` '7"0 944 -
�f
t
17-�
N
Not to Scale
Figure 2. U.S.G.S.
Excelsior Quadrangle Map
Spring Hill Golf Club
�joPray Orono, Minnesota
Environmental
Project No. 2012.029
� T
a
4"
t
JF
.,_ x
tt
„
i
'w M
fir: • � t t•
1
w:+we
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 3. Aerial Photo With
;f Approximate Wetland Boundaries
{1
Spring Hill Golf Club
boPray Orono, Minnesota
Environmental
Project No. 2012.029
� � � ,� a.s�--• �, �� Wil,�
a
Approximate
Site location
MEL 'ILI
-14
v
r Fl
4.
Wetlands
Freshwater Fmorgent
} Frestvwster Forested,Shrub w
Estuanne ane Manne Deetwaler �
Estuanne and Manne
i Frrs„wNter Nina ' N
'
Lake
Rrvenne Not to Scale
Olhgr 6
Figure 4. National Wetland
Inventory Map
r; Spring Hill Golf Club
FjoPray Orono, Minnesota
Fnvironmental
Project No. 2012.029
r ,
C O
1 23'A 4{AW
7,) 3�rJ
MEI�I\A •.
� — „ 3
Approximate
,,• • sit � M.OP �I �� � " ' �+ ,R Site Location
11111Pi• bll W i_ ` durd
+ i • •I
6
/ LONb LAKE • t't wA
S7 r 1ur1 (JRe
12, cc QRZ
,-
'_- �•4 tom- P�i eC+�l/� •`" '9�M) WAYZATA
ow
is(60
N
Not to Scale
Figure 5. DNR Protected Waters
Y Inventory Map
4yy
Spring Hill Golf Club
boPray Orono, Minnesota
Environmental
Project No. 2012.029
N
Not to Scale
n,.
t
$, a
Y
Approximate
Site Location
Soil Map Unit Legend
L22D2 Lester loam, 12-18% slopes, Partially Hydric
L24A Glencoe loam, depressional, 0-1% slopes, All Hydric
Figure 6. Hennepin County
y Soil Survey Map
A Spring Hill Golf Club
F)oPray Orono, Minnesota
s
Fnvironmental
Project No. 2012.029
,
e �
a�
l`.� ` k ,*y � � .» -. .!+ 1 day'-`• � �`2-'-.� '"^ ?;.'- �� k�b.iS s ,�`r,.,, '.
FigureWetland 15 northeast arm looking east along the south edge of the wetland.
7. • • Photos
Spring Hill Golf •
Orono, • .
Appendix A
S
rY
y'- +wmS-1J
1 �
Wetland 15 NE Arm
Wetland 15
Delineated
{„res•,—� +aids—a. .+,Ics-�,
by GES
N
Not to Scale
Figure 8. Detail from James R. Hill
Survey of Wetland Boundaries
Spring Hill Golf Club
r F)oPray Orono, Minnesota
Environmental
Project No. 2012.029
Appendix B
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hit GC Wetland 15 NE arm City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 5/13/2013
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill GC State: Minnesota Sampling Point: S15-1
Investigator(s): Kelly Bopray,PSS,CWD Section,Township, Range: Sec 26,T1 18N,R23 W
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Toe slope/Swale Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave
Slope(%): 0-1% Let: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit NameL24A Glencoe loam,Depressional 4WI Classification: not id'ed
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 X 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: Wetland 15,NE Arm
Remarks:(Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Soils are mollisols. Precipitation levels are higher than average but still within the normal YTD levels.
VEGETATION--Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominan Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 it ) %Cover t Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 20 Y FACW that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 5 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata 5 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC 100.0011/6 (A/B)
20 =Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub straturr (Plot size: 15 ft ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Ribes cynosbah 7 Y FAC Total%Cover of:
2 Cornus alba 2 Y FACW OBL species 25 x 1 = 25
3 Rubus idaeus 1 N FACU FACW species 97 x2= 194
4 FAC species 7 x 3= 21
5 FACU species 1 x 4= 4
10 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) Column totals 130 (A) 244 (B)
1 Phalaris arundinacea 75 Y FACW Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.88
2 Carex lacustris 20 Y OBL
3 Typha angustifolia 5 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is s3.0•
7 Morphogical adaptations'(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
g —separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
100 =Total Cover _(explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: 30 it ) •Indicators of hydric soil and weaand hydrok)gy must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 __TrYWr_0_P_fiYtIc
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL Sampling Point: S15-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type" Loc'" Texture Remarks
0-8 N 2/0 laom
8-16 N 2/0 clay loam
16-20+ 10YR 2/1 10YR 4/4 5 C M clay loam
*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(Al) _Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)(LRR K,L.R)
_Hlsttc Eplpedon(A2) _Sandy Redox(S5) _Dark Surface(67)(LRR K,L)
_Black Histic(A3) Stripped Matrix(S6) _5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L.R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) _Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(Al 1) _Redox Dark Surface(F6)
X 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
problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type; Hydric soil present? Y
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is reouired:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauired)
X Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(B13) Surface Soil Cracks(RB)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(B14) _Drainage Patterns(610)
Saturation(A3) _Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(B1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots Crayfish Burrows(CB)
Sediment Deposits(B2) (C3) '—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(131)
Algal Mat or Crust(84) Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Soils Geomorphic Position(02)
Iron Deposits(B5) (C6) X FAC-Neulral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) —_Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(139)
Water-Stained Leaves(69) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 0-4
Water table present? Yes —5F-- No Depth(inches): _____TY_ Indicators of wetland
Saturation present? Yes —_ No Depth(inches): 0 hydrology present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hit GC Welland 15 NE arm City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 5/13/2013
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill GC State: Minnesota Sampling Point: S15-2
Investigator(s): Kelly Bopray,PSS,CWD Section,Township,Range: Sec 26,T1 18N,R23 W
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): hillslope Local relief(concave,convex,none): linear
Slope(%): 12-20% Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name L22D2 Lester loam VWI Classification: not id'ed
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 X or hydrology 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: upland
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report)
Soils are mollisols. Precipitation levels are higher than average but still within the normal YTD levels.
VEGETATION--Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominan Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum ;Plot size: 30 ft ) %Cover t Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 Acer saccharum 35 Y FACU that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 3 (A)
2 Acer rubrum 15 Y FAC Total Number of Dominant
3 Quercus rubra 10 N FACU Species Across all Strata 6 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC' 50.00% (A/B)
60 =Total Cover
SSaoling/Shrub straturr (Plot size: 15 ft ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhamnus cathartica 10 Y FAC Total%Cover of:
2 Ribes cynosbah 5 Y FAC OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
3 Juniperus virgiruana 5 Y FACU FACW species 0 x 2= 0
4 FAC species 30 x 3= 90
5 FACU species 55 x4= 220
20 =Total Cover UPL species 0 X5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5 ft ) Column totals 85 (A) 310 (B)
1 Parthenocissus quinquefolia 5 Y FACU Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.65
2
3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 —Dominance test is X50%
6 _Prevalence index is s3.0'
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
g _separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
5 =Total Cover _(explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: 30 ft ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? N
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL Sampling Point: S15-2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type" Loc" Texture Remarks
0-6 N 2/0 loam
6-18+ 10YR 211 clay loam
'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(Ai) _Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)(LRR K,L,R)
_Histic Epipcdon(A2) _Sandy Redox(S5) _Dark Surface(S7)(LRR K,L)
_Black Histic(A3) _Stripped Matrix(S6) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfde(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) _Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) '—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
problematic
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type: Hydric soil present? N
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required%check all that aoaly) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(A1) _Aquatic Fauna(B13) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(1314) _Drainage Patterns(B10)
Saturation(A3) —Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots_Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) _(C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(83) _Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(B5) _(C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(87) _Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) —Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field ervat ons:
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:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
Notice of Decision
Local Government Unit(LGU) 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.
Type of Decision:
®Wetland Boundary or Type ❑No-Loss ❑Exemption ❑ Sequencing
❑Replacement Plan ❑Banking Plan
Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendation if any):
❑Approve ❑Approve with conditions ❑Deny
Summary(or attach):
2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT 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 flagged in the field and described in the delineation report dated&received
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page ] 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 Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank:
Bank Account# Bank Service Area County Credits Approved for
Withdrawal(sq.ft. or nearest.01
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 Assurance: 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 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 credits, confirmation that
BWSR has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved
replacement plan.
Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been met!
LGU Authorized Signature:
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. If additional details on the decision exist,they have been provided to the landowner and
are available from the LGU upon request.
Name Title
Catherine Bach District Technician
Signaftyrf Date Phone Number and E-mail
2/2/12 (952)641-4504
cbach@minnehahacreek.org
V W1 .
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 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 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:
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 2 of 3
i
I
® Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send ❑Appeal of LGU governing body decision. Send
petition and$_k_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.peterson@state.mn.us
❑ LGU TEP member(if different than LGU Contact):
® DNR TEP member:Jack Gleason—john.gleason@state.mn.us
® DNR Regional Office(if different than DNR TEP member):Melissa Doperalski—
Mclissa.Doper•alsld@state.mn.us
❑ WD or WMO(if applicable):
® Applicant(notice only)and Landowner(if different): Tim Johnson—timj@springhillgc.com
® Members of the public who requested notice(notice only):
Graham Environmental Services(Mike Graham)—mgraham@grahamenvironmental.com
City of Orono(Christine Mattson)—cmattson@ci.orono.mn.us
® Corps of Engineers Project Manager(notice only):Melissa Jenny—
Melissa.m.jenny@usace.army.mil
❑ BWSR 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/wea/DNR TEP contacts.pdf
Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices:
NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region:
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
Bemidji,MN 56601
For a map of DNR Administrative Regions,see:http://files.dnr.state.inn.us/aboutdnr/dnr_regions.pdf
➢For a list of Corps of Project Managers: www.mvp.usace.army.mil/regglato!y/default.asp?paeeid=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.ATTACHMENTS
In addition to the site locator map,list any other attachments:
El
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 3 of 3
ti
i� 1 'G• .r+ J 6
v Ie ��o � �, ^. r! /oo�"oma sGr ,Iartc• � -' -y' . ! _1 �_,.. ilt �
�r'� "`��Wlte". ',� ,t`:. '9�, n� /_{r.C�. } '� + `�_.j�-v• i'. S�,l�• '2 j�. :1 ��-t
? � YI ' _,t V � •,
19t0 . �..-. '�, !,^ b -fig }si°t'b :� _ O
Approximate o�
25
Site Location _
-Irinttg,�7hj1 OR-0N(' ��� •fSny.iii ,
o i Moo
�z tQ `
ova• • �._. � 1. ipo /�Ooo - y"o j
Nw
906
v
D e 11 r• h r; ' ;9 �� ( k�
Cy
ry
51.4
W 1110111
to
ti
1 `
=n- _ .�; ��. a __....--� r_ •• �� g ` �` �" ;;fid
•FSI ' , �'� �,� _. �' __,,.s° r,. -�� ,.-_ t0, � - nt"..'Y _ !, `, •
11 • \ �.��'_�r...�... , Y \ h� \O.
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 2. U.S.G.S.
Excelsior Quadrangle
Spring Hill Golf Club
EOrono, Minnesota
S �
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
Notice of Application
Local Government Unit(LGU) 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 WII-31
Type of Application check all that apply):
®Wetland Boundary or Type ❑No-Loss ❑Exemption ❑ Sequencing
❑Replacement Plan ❑Banking Plan
Summary and description of proposed project attach additional sheets as necessary):
Spring Hill Golf Club(Tim Johnson)has applied for approval of wetland boundary&type for a project area
within the parcel at 1050 Tamarack Drive in the city of Orono(PID#26-118-23-42-0006). The application
was received on November 1,2011 and completed on December 5,2011. The delineation was performed by
Graham Environmental Services,Inc.on October 24,2011. The boundary was reviewed in the field on
November 1,2011 by MCWD staff.
2.APPLICATION REVIEW AND DECISION
Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420.0255, Subp.
3 provides notice that an application was made to the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as specified
above. A copy of the application is attached. Comments can be submitted to:
Name and Title of LGU Contact Person Comments must be received by (minimum 15
Catherine Bach business-day comment period):
District Technician January 4,2012(4:30 PM)
Address(if different than LGU) Date,time,and location of decision:
18202 Minnetonka Blvd A decision will be made following completion of
Deephaven,MN 55391 the comment period.
Phone Number and E-mail Address Decision-maker for this application:
(952)641-4504 ® Staff
cbach@minnehahacreek.org ❑ Governing Board or Council
Signature: Date:
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Pagel of2
3.LIST OF ADDRESSEES
® SWCD TEP member: Stacey Lijewski—stacey.lijewski@co.hennepin.mn.us
® BWSR TEP member:Lynda Peterson—lynda.peterson@state.mn.us
❑ LGU TEP member(if different than LGU Contact):
❑ DNR TEP member:
® DNR Regional Office(if different than DNR TEP member):Melissa Doperalski—
Melissa.Doperalski@state.mn.us
❑ WD or WMO(if applicable):
® Applicant(notice only)and Landowner(if different):Tim Johnson—timj@springhillgc.com
® Members of the public who requested notice(notice only):
Graham Environmental Services(Mike Graham)—mgraham@grahamenvironmental.com
City of Orono(Christine Mattson)—cmattson@ci.orono.mn.us
® Corps of Engineers Project Manager(notice only):Melissa Jenny—Mefissa.m.jenny@usace.army.mil
❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator(wetland bank plan applications only)
4.MAILING INFORMATION
➢For a list of BWSR TEP representatives:www.bwsr.state.mn.us/contact/WCA areas.pdf
➢For a list of DNR TEP representatives:www.bwsr.state.mn.ustwetlands/wca/DNR TEP contacts.pdf
➢
Department of Natural Resources Regional Offices:
NW Region: NE Region: Central Region: Southern Region:
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.NE 1201 E.Hwy.2 1200 Warner Road 261 Hwy. 15 South
Bemidji,MN 56601 Grand Rapids,MN 55744 St.Paul,MN 55106 New Ulm,MN 56073
For a map of DNR Administrative Regions, see:hft://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dnr regions:pdf
➢For a list of Corps of Project Managers:www.mvp.usace.ann .mil/re ug latory/default.asp?pa eid=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
5.ATTACHMENTS
In addition to the application,list any other attachments:
BWSR Forms 7-1-10 Page 2 of 2
Minnesota Wetlard Conservation
Application forApproval of • Type and Boundary
1. Project/Site Information
Project/Site Name: Spring Hill Golf Club Local Government Unit: MCWD
Location(address and/or T, R, Sec.): Sec. 26, T1 18N, R23W
2. Applicant Information
Applicant Name: Spring Hill Golf Club(Tim Johnson) Address: 725 County Road 6
City, State,Zip: Wayzata, MN 55391
E-mail: timj@springhillgc.com Phone:612-812-0374
3. Agent/Consultant Information
Company Name(if applicable): GES, Inc. Contact Person: Mike Graham
Address: City, State,Zip:
E-mail: Phone: 715-778-5730 ext. 12
4. Description of Request
Check all that apply: x Wetland Boundary(must attach wetland delineation report)
x Wetland Type(Eggers& Reed and/or Circular 39 type)
S. Signature
By signature below, the applicant requests a determination from the Local Government Unit under
Minnesota Rules 8 0.0225 on the submitted wetland boundary and type information in this application.
The applicant als irms that they are the owner of the subject property or have permission from the
lando ner t his determination.
Ap licant or A orized Agent Signature Date
Important Notes:
• The applicant may be required to submit multiple copies of the report/information to the
LGU. The LGU may require the applicant to submit copies directly to Technical Evaluation
Panel Members. Check with your LGU regarding their submittal requirements.
The LGU decision must be made in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 15.99.
For LGU use only
Date Received:
Page 1 of 1
BWSR Wetland Boundaryfrype Application Form 11/10/08
Graham Environmental Servicer, Inc.
GE
Spring Hill Golf Club
Wetland Delineation Report
Orono, Minnesota
m
Cyt/y� 1
l
Wetland A—Looking North
December 5, 2011
GES Project No.2011.036
r
Graham Environmental Services, Inc. 51095 Westland Drive
Spring Valley,WI 54767
Phone: 715-778-5730/888-279-2070
Fax: 715-778-5867/888-279-2069
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club
Orono, Minnesota
December 5, 2011
Background
Graham Environmental Services, Inc. (GES) was retained to delineate wetlands
in the vicinity of two areas proposed for improvement at the Spring Hill Golf Club.
The site is located in part of the NW '/4 SE '/4 Section 26, T1 18N, R23W,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (Figure 1). As shown on the U.S.G.S. Quadrangle
map (Figure 2), the topography on the site is rolling.
On October 24, 2011, GES conducted an evaluation of the site, collecting data
and delineating two wetland boundaries as shown on a recent aerial photograph
in Figure 3.
Methodologies
The wetlands were delineated using the on-site methods contained in the
"Routine Determinations" section of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers "Wetlands
Delineation Manuaf' (Technical Report Y-87-1, 1987), as well as "Interim Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Midwest Region"
(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2010). This is the methodology currently used to
determine wetlands by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for implementation of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and by Local Government Units under the Wetland
Conservation Act.
GES classified the wetlands under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
Cowardin system, Circular 39 and Eggers and Reed methodologies. Soil colors
described herein follow Munsell Soil Color Charts. Hydric soil properties
described follow Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (Untied
States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0. L.M.
Vasilias, G.W. Hurt and C.V. Noble (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the
National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils).
f
17,
A& AMOK 11wwwgraharnenvironmental.
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Ciub Site
GES Project No.2011.036
December 5, 2011
Page 2 of 3
Results
Wetland A
GES delineated a narrow wetland band that bisects a fairway and connects to
additional wetland to the west and east. We would classify the portion of the
wetland within the fairway as seasonally-flooded palustrine emergent (PEMC)
which equates to Type 3 inland fresh shallow marsh under the Circular 39
classification system and 13B Shallow Marsh under the Eggers and Reed
system.
The wetland was evaluated along one transect on the south side of the wetland
strip as indicated in Figure 3. The upland and wetland data collection points
were located approximately at each end of the transect line indicated in Figure 3.
The upland is described as mowed fairway consisting of Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis). The upland slope adjacent to the delineated wetland boundary
rises relatively abruptly and consists of"rough"within a fairway. The transition
between the wetland and upland at the transect location is characterized by a
relatively abrupt change from OBL vegetation to FAC vegetation. Soils also
demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from dark and gleyed silt loam and clay
loam to lighter colored mixed fill.
Wetland B
GES delineated a portion of the edge of this wetland which is part of the same
wetland that was delineated as "Wetland A"to the north. We would classify the
portion of the wetland we delineated as a combination of saturated palustrine
emergent/seasonally-flooded palustrine emergent(PEMB/PEMC)which equates
to Type 2 inland fresh meadow/Type 3 inland fresh shallow marsh under the
Circular 39 classification system and 15B Fresh (Wet) Meadow/13B Shallow
Marsh under the Eggers and Reed system.
The wetland was evaluated along two transects as indicated in Figure 3. The
upland and wetland data collection points were located approximately at each
end of the transect lines indicated in Figure 3. The upland at the east transect
(Transect 1) is described as upland shrubs, trees and "old field" consisting
predominantly of staghorn sumac and smooth brome. The upland slope adjacent
to the delineated wetland boundary rises relatively abruptly. The transition
between the wetland and upland at the transect location is characterized by a
relatively abrupt change from FACW and OBL vegetation (Phalaris arundinacea
and Carex/acustris)to mixed vegetation (sumac, brome, gray dogwood). Soils
also demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from very black mucky loam to
lighter sandy loam and loamy sands.
Wetland Delineation Report
Spring Hill Golf Club Site
GES Project No. 2011.036
December 5, 2011
Page 3 of 3
The upland at the west transect (Transect 2) is described as planted native
prairie consisting predominantly of switch grass and big bluestem. The upland
slope adjacent to the delineated wetland boundary rises relatively abruptly. The
transition between the wetland and upland at the transect location is
characterized by a relatively abrupt change from FACW and OBL vegetation to
FAC vegetation. Soils also demonstrated a relatively abrupt change from very
black mucky loam to lighter sandy loam and loamy sands.
For more detailed information on each wetland, see data forms in Appendix A.
Jurisdictional boundaries on the wetlands were established where the soil
profiles in the upland soils demonstrated a lighter matrix tone, there was a
change in plant communities, hydrology indicators were absent in the upland and
a change in topography occurred.
Figure 4 and 5 depict the National Wetlands Inventory map and the Hennepin
County soil survey, respectively. Figure 6 shows the Minnesota DNR Protected
Waters Inventory map of the areas evaluated.
Ground photos of each wetland transect location are included in Figures 7 —9.
The information contained herein represents our findings during wetland
delineation activities conducted on October 24, 2011 at the referenced site.
Respectfully submitted,
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
eZra .
Professional Wetland Scientist No. 365
Minnesota Wetland Delineator Certified No. 1179
Enclosures
Spur
m
Medina
Gieeu
Deer HIII Rd oak Palk
z
Approximate NunterDr
Site Location
2
Z °
= E 6 =
0 61h Aye N I--
Orono Plymouth
In N`11 Rd
W Fab>
w
z a
m �M/Ord Rd
Loo9
o, as
c
Daniels d} z C
Long Lakegiyd-W Olds 4y
146 ;_ . -- —�Ydy� o
12 ,1 m
'04s a
ko ^ri t Wand iP!1988-2006 Microsoft Cor ration and:or its sucofiers All rights reserved". V LL
a
I�
N
Not to Scale
Figure 1 . Site Location Map
G Spring Hill Golf Club
Essill, Orono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
r
rl
p
!1007 o Eft LL R ''., :f + r .. t r+ /l �¢��
• y i ifs
Talr�' nuc? :
\
Q Jq►oo
I
. J.. C9 f Cj s
Approximate
25
a +frinfty }1« Site Location "��J #ynr + i; QT_ + °
°Ro"+' 25 Moo
Y ,.• T�( MJ :-- foa o
<J n
r.
..� IS
(�
. r _
a,
4 ,,.. ,�'_ •� \• � � `� �� ✓ � Y syr `T/.
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 2. U.S.G.S.
Excelsior Quadrangle
G Spring HIII Golf Club
E+ Orono, Minnesota
SGES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
ll 4
16
S
At
w
r � � IdL
x
- r
N
1y
lY,
Q
"
0 z
Well C.
*
rt - Approximate Transect Loc n
15011 MapQuest - Portions CCJ2011 NA)fTEQ i
•
• A - . • •
A 0 • • • i • •
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
National Wetlands Inventor
Doc 5,2011
Wetlands
Review I♦ Fraahweler Em.ry.nt
-
Areas nFresnwater FostedShrub
Eswanns ant Manna Deepwater
Estuame and Manua
x s
Fresnwater pond
lake
,� .. Rrvaruta
IMP
Status
A
DKytal
;. scan
Non.Dgdat
} • ' F No Data
..
} r Zy
VI
y _it It
User Remarks:
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 4. National Wetlands
Inventory Map
G Spring Hill Golf Club
Ess%
Orono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
Legend
L22C2Lester loam, morainic, 6 to 12 percent slopes, eroded
L221D2Lester loam, morainic, 12 to 18 percent slopes, eroded
L22E Lester loam, morainic, 18 to 25 percent slopes
L23A Cordova loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
L24A Glencoe loam, depressional, 0 to 1 percent slopes
L36A Hamel, overwash-Hamel complex, 1 to 4 percent slopes
L49A Klossner soils, depressional, 0 to 1 percent slopes
L132AHamel-Glencoe, depressional, complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes
A
N
Not to Scale
Figure 5. Hennepin County
y� Soil Survey
G Spring Hill Golf Club
ESN� Orono, Minnesota
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
C O
Approximate 4tigw�
Site Location 73 .h
~--— --
MEI„%A 113711P—
r
Od1.
�� • X39 i i 1 NroP
1160 16 d
i A
LONG LAKE '31 wM
•V•'M•
^c �1� `ti`b - HadleyA
13 :., fuM 12 "k.
"`�' fSi� $•S.�W i �� WAYZATA
N
Not to Scale
Figure 6. Minnesota DNR
Public Waters Inventory Map
Spring Hill Golf Club
V�
E-+ Orono, Minnesota
S
GES Project No. 2011.036
Graham Environmental Services, Inc.
a 111 R
"t
tp�
yl
J t
`�� �. { �l� + 'r'{r^.
+ ,i'. .' �$�° �,',� ". � t�'z +$�• �✓�'�. µ.Vi � t i ,�3r
r
if
i
x
7 " 1
rt
a
l
�• .' ��r ��� � ����� .�-,}. ld.f`',-4'��d�[ 't� 1 ,�,"fin � \��r �t 1'�� t �� �` f r 1`�'*�,
' r.. � r� ; ���� ` l f 4`�. ,��,;�,/' ` � � 'y'�. 'fit a p� � ��+c •� b .�,{ .��Y'� ^,�} - °� ,> ;
�!.,& � �,,;� li l�� ,�+'�.y) � �•yrAlt� � � � y. t� ��� ��,,�•'� ,t �,'y �r, "�..x} ��3,1.
..� ) f�,� +L 1' �',j 1�'rt� � ���� t4 �S�}� ,��rt�`0�.�'�0� �•tyr`T}r�� �< ��Fd 1' �, _.,". wy'�'.
'` ,�l�'r �`},* �� 'i�' � S�3•�f�-��''� 4'+ft�rr��� ���1 . C PrR`�ru t�'�" 'r�`t� �`5,�+�e���Y �? S.-�" �,•�` 'a+
' liRR,��4 � ��Jp'�\ 'a�`� �,•, �� r ti � ;C� I �Y ,�ir t t�`> �„� � ��+'- �.
r•r,r � ,, � , ♦r Lys` , �;, ,.. � as �--v�.�T t M1^ � , r ' `
_
i
. idl
5 ,
T
' 1 Y4
NPI
� ,.-1� ��o-� its •t�R �:l j�.f,+��� ��l' ,�a ���"..tt �yi��ST,� � j'ti"��' �� ���i � rr
' ��: �n ; � �r ��'.: � y >t� a,lis ��k �Ir �iw`+ � `„`RJ� �y��1}.✓�d'��+'}�� � � �1 f�, �,r° i}��,.,;
it x
r
Appendix A
1 �
Wetland A-Transect 1 Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlanr Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Sar)lino/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of-
2 OBL species 144 x 1 = 144
3 FACW species 10 x2= 20
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 54 radius ) Column totals 154 (A) 164 (B)
1 Lemna minor 80 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.06
2 Typha x glauca 30 N OBL
3 Typha angustifolia 30 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Polygonum amphibium 2 N OBL X Dominance testis>50%
6 Bidens cemuus 1 N OBL X Prevalence index is 53.0*
7 Lythrum salicaria 1 N OBL Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
154 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland A-Transect 1 Wetland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: •ansect 1 -Wetlar
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' Loc— Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 2/1 silt loam
4-10 4/10GY 10YR 4/6 20 C M clay loam
10-20 10YR 2/1 silt loam
"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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) X Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
_2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
X 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? Y
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
X Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(613) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
7 High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(614) _Drainage Patterns(610)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(64) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils X Geomorphic Position(132)
Iron Deposits(135) (C6) _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(89) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 14 Wetland
Water table present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 6 hydrology
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 5 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland A-Transect 1 Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name 1WI Classification:
Are climaticthydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlam N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Saolina/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
3 FACW species 0 x 2= 0
4 FAC species 100 x 3= 300
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 100 (A) 300 (B)
1 Poa pratensis 100 Y FAC Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.00
2
3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is<_3.0*
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 —separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
100 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot Size: ) Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Mowed upland fairway planted to Poa pratensis per golf course manager.
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland A-Transect 1 Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 1 -Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
0-18 10YR 2/1-3/3 mixed clay loam fill soils are mixed fill
*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(Al) _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) _5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF1 2)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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:
Soils consist of mixed fill from past fairway construction. Some mottles noted in fill material believed to be relict.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(613) _Surface Soil Cracks(66)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(B14) _Drainage Patterns(1310)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) Presence 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(135) (C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(87) _Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(68) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Nam( VWI Classification:
Are climaticthydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlam Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 1 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 =Total Cover
Saplino/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of.
2 OBL species 15 x 1 = 15
3 FACW species 80 x2= 160
4 FAC species 5 x 3= 15
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 100 (A) 190 (B)
1 Phalaris arundinacea 75 Y FACW Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.90
2 Carex lacustris 10 N OBL
3 Solanum dulcamara 5 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Typha x glauca 5 N OBI _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Cornus racemose 5 N FACW X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0'
7 Morphogical adaptations'(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation"
100 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: )
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Wetland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: •ansect 1 -Wetlar
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
0-20 N 2/0 Mucky loam
*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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) X Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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? Y
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
X Surface Water(Al) Aquatic Fauna(613) Surface Soil Cracks(66)
X High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(1314) Drainage Patterns(B10)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(B1) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(B3) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils X Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(135) (C6) 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(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 10 Wetland
Water table present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 6 hydrology
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 5 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 1 -Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none): t
Slope(%): Let: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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? N
Hydric soil present? N Is the sampled area within a wetlani N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (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: 25.00% (A/B)
0 ;Total Cover
Saplina/Shrub stratur (Plot size: 15-ft.radius ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Rhus hirta 20 Y UPL Total%Cover of:
2 Quercus rubra 5 Y FACU OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
3 FACW species 35 x 2= 70
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 5 x4= 20
25 ;Total Cover UPL species 80 x 5= 400
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 130 (A) 500 (B)
1 Bromus inermis 60 Y UPL Prevalence Index=B/A= 3.85
2 Cornus racemosa 25 Y FACW
3 Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Carex lacustris 10 N OBL —Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 —Dominance test is>50%
6 —Prevalence index is s3.0*
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
105 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: )
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? N
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-Transect 1 Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 1 -Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' Loc" Texture Remarks
0-14 10YR 3/2 fine sandy loam
14-24 10YR 3/3 loamy fine sand
"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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF1 2)
2 cm Muck(A10) Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is reauired:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(1313) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(614) Drainage Patterns(810)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(134) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils _Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(65) (C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) _Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Wetland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 2-Wetland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlano Y
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover 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
Saolina/Shrub stratur (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 95 x 1 = 95
3 FACW species 30 x 2= 60
4 FAC species 0 x 3= 0
5 FACU species 0 x4= 0
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 5-ft.radius ) Column totals 125 (A) 155 (B)
1 Scirpus cyperinus 30 Y OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 1.24
2 Typha angustifolia 30 Y OBL
3 Carex lacustris 30 Y OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Agrostis gigantea 30 Y FACW _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Salix nigra 5 N OBL X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is<_3.0*
7 Morphogical adaptations*(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation*
125 =Total Cover (explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Wetland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: •ansect 2-Wetlar
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type* Loc** Texture Remarks
0-20 N 2/0 Mucky loam
*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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) X Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF1 2)
2 cm Muck(A10) _Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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? Y
Depth(inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is reauired:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two reauiredl
Surface Water(A1) _Aquatic Fauna(613) _Surface Soil Cracks(B6)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(1314) _Drainage Patterns(610)
X Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(131) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(62) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(63) 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(135) (C6) 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(69) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 10 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Upland Data
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Midwest Region
Project/Site Spring Hill Golf Club City/County: Orono/Hennepin Sampling Date: 10/24/11
Applicant/Owner: Spring Hill Golf Club State: MN Sampling Point: Transect 2-Upland
Investigator(s): MJG Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Local relief(concave,convex,none):
Slope(%): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name VWI Classification:
Are climaticthydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? (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 wetlani N
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 Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Species Staus Number of Dominant Species
1 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
2 Total Number of Dominant
3 Species Across all Strata: 2 (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5 that are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
0 ;Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size: 15-ft.radius ) Prevalence Index Worksheet
1 Total%Cover of:
2 OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
3 FACW species 0 x 2= 0
4 FAC species 80 x 3= 240
5 FACU species 2 x4= 8
0 =Total Cover UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum (Plot size: 54 radius ) Column totals 87 (A) 253 (B)
1 Panicum virgatum 50 Y FAC Prevalence Index=B/A= 2.91
2 Andropogon gerardii 30 Y FAC
3 Carex lacustris 5 N OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4 Solidago canadensis 2 N FACU _Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
5 Ratibida pinnata 2 N NI X Dominance test is>50%
6 X Prevalence index is 53.0'
7 Morphogical adaptations'(provide
8 supporting data in Remarks or on a
9 _separate sheet)
10 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation"
89 =Total Cover _(explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
1 present,unless disturbed or problematic
2 Hydrophytic
0 =Total Cover vegetation
present? Y
Remarks:(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Wetland B-West Transect Upland Data
SOIL Sampling Point: 'ransect 2-Uplan
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(Inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' Loc" Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 3/2 fine sandy loam
10-20 10YR 3/3 loamy fine sand
'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(Al) _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) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat(S3)(LRR K,L,R)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1) Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR K,L,R)
_Stratified Layers(A5) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) _Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF1 2)
2 cm Muck(A10) Depleted Matrix(F3) _Other(explain in remarks)
_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:
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that aoolvl Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Surface Water(Al) _Aquatic Fauna(13 13) _Surface Soil Cracks(136)
High Water Table(A2) _True Aquatic Plants(B14) _Drainage Patterns(1310)
Saturation(A3) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
Water Marks(61) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
Sediment Deposits(132) (C3) _Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
Drift Deposits(133) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
Algal Mat or Crust(84) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils _Geomorphic Position(D2)
Iron Deposits(135) (C6) _FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(67) Thin Muck Surface(C7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) _Gauge or Well Data(D9)
Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Other(Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes No X Depth(inches): hydrology
Saturation present? Yes No X Depth(inches): present? N
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe recorded data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
W 4-
O
= Z
II
Q �
U c
N p
w
O 0
0 00
gal'44414
Y. i�
a 1, ,
al al a
ili.%� �
i 41 Q Z
W Q
W I
� 5
OD
1
"`J
7 � v
> 00
0
0
DELINEATED CP
WETLAND or, 0
1 4 41b s 4WD 4ft Mb
a an s s 4M 40b
_.ab.��
4w 4mb 4m dw
Am 4w 4i
s SCALE IN FEET
_ 0 100
o
0 q 1 inch = 100 feet
E rv"\
Soo
� k
naafi)atr. frrre-aw((ase)aww MM-1'V.MW ti ALNM vu B
mu M 7—M W-6 A m w it Dote Hflalo dMon `J r"s � m ■ ,�o �
IRId'mQ1t00 Y 7 7p8ILL a v
$ SHIw/SMNNVU a'P i rn 'VNR O—tt�
Ul `IIIH I SGWRr � a� >3nzD ,oto� �x>ixas
+i � 1 �l-��-�,• ; - �X�� ���``\: �\ �X-�/"�'`�~'1.� 1. $:.z
4 9
F q
11
' J �`y.
R1 Fo:F J 7
CD14
;2Z Z
Jig
e_ a a a
--------------------
�$ g - -___ t _- -_} Orr � nt 1 -' �' •� .�
N 8x ---- �