Loading...
CAS-44_FOX PROPERTIESZ"" 7 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan USH 212 Concrete Batch Plant Site Fox Properties Parcel Powers Blvd, City of Chanhassen, MN Introduction This Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan is submitted for a temporary concrete batch plant site. The site will be used for the Minnesota Department of Transportation USH 212 project. The site is located on Powers Blvd in the City of Chanhassen, MN. 2 Description of Activity The majority of the work on the site consists of preparing the site. This will entail stripping topsoil and storing it in berms along the perimeter of the site. Upon completion of the topsoil removal, the site will be covered with a crushed aggregate to facilitate truck traffic. Once the base course is complete the concrete batch plant will be placed. Aggregates will be hauled and stock piled at the west end of the site. Once the preparatory work is complete the next operation will be the production of the concrete. This will involve mainly truck traffic. There will be trucks hauling aggregate, cement and fly ash to the site and truck hauling concrete from the site to the project. Upon completion of the project, the concrete plant will be removed and the site will be restored to the original state, which is a plowed agricultural field. 3 Chain of Responsibility The inspection and maintenance of erosion and sediment control devices will be the responsibility of all persons working on the site. The primary responsibility will fall on the Plant Foreman, Cory Krohn. In the event that Mr. Krohn is not available, the Paving Superintendent will assume the responsibility. The Paving Superintendent is Don Shonyo. 4 Erosion and Sediment Control Device The site will employ three main types of control devices. They are berms, berm overflows and re -vegetation. The berms will be used to contain storm water on the site and direct its discharge. The berms will be located on the west and south boundaries of the site. Most of the berms will be quite high and used to store the topsoil from the site. There will also be smaller berms, 3 to 4 feet installed at the discharge points of the project. There are two discharge points associated with the site once the grading is completed. They are located in the south east and north east corners of the project. The berms at these discharge points will be constructed to allow a small settling basin to be created above the berm. The berms will have a riprap overflow constructed at each of the discharge points. The overflow will allow storm water to build to approximately 2 feet prior to discharging over the overflow. Vegetation will also be used to control runoff and sediment. The berms created around the perimeter of the site will be seeded with and approved ground cover to stabilize the new slopes. 5 Timing of Installation Installation of all erosion and sediment control devices will be completed as part of the grading operations. Once berms are constructed and shaped, the riprap will be placed on the overflows and see will be sown on the topsoil berms. The seeding will be completed a maximum of 3 days after berms have been completed. The time to complete grading is expected to be no more that 5 days. 6 Inspection and Maintenance Inspections of the erosion and sediment control devices will take place on a daily basis. Formal documented inspections will occur one every 7 days. In addition to the weekly inspection, the devices will be inspected after any rainfall that exceeds 0.5 inches. The inspection will involve reviewing the effectiveness of the erosion and sediment control devices. If it appears that the devices are not providing sufficient control, additional or new control devices will be employed. MnDOT and City of Chanhassen will be asked for input on device selection should they be needed. Following inspections, recommendation or direction will be given for maintenance of the devices. With the devices employed for this site, the primary maintenance will be the removal of sediment form the area above the berms. When this is required, the areas will be dewatered and the sediment removed with onsite equipment. Additionally, there may be maintenance required on the berms. In the event that erosion occurs on the slopes, the areas will be regarded and reseeded. 4 cy— TREE LINE V-7 DISCHARGE POINT 2 co m w j40 3 AGSer 3 a GEN• SET Q�J PLANT- \� Q A GG. Pyr, A GG. POSSIBLE' •WAsNouT Dc+c 1 3 DISCHARGE POINT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT SITE LAYOUT SCALE: y /� APPROVED BY: ' - 7Q DRAWN BY DATE: REVISED PCI a12. LA ' SITE DRAWING NUMBER n mmn acorn NIPPROW D, -4,I z PROPOSED 3 ELEVATIDN i L 25 PROFILE DETAIL I RIPRAP BERM c► nntc -rn nr-rr_.nnrnnov crr_ r,rr% OVER FLDW PROFILE DETAIL Z. ToPSO)L BERM ,^%ySI I 9a ELEVATI ON N 2s► PROFILE DETAIL 3 WASHOUT I 30 DETAIL `) ACCESS RO/ D DETA1 L SCALE: DATE: PCI ?-/?- SHEET IZ SHEET APPROVED BY slrY DRAWN BY REVISED DRAWING NUMBER i —�— Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering a Surveying a Planning Soil Testing a Environmental Services RECEIVED GC www.schoellmadson.com R OCT 18 2004 October 5, 2004 CITMCFCH4NHASSEN Ms. Lori Haak, Water Resources Coordinator City of Chanhassen 690 Coulter Drive, P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Subject: Wetland Delineation Fox Property— Lyman Boulevard and Powers Boulevard Dear Ms. Haak: Please find enclosed a copy of the wetland delineation report performed on behalf of Lundgren Brothers for the Fox Property in Chanhassen. A copy has also been sent to Mark Wilson at the RPBCWD. During the delineation, six wetland basins were delineated on the property. A review of aerial photography indicated no fewer than four additional areas that appeared to have hydric signatures. However, a field inspection of these areas revealed that they were not wetland areas. At your earliest convenience, I would like to site up a time to visit the site with you and verify the delineation. Please be aware that it is a large site and would likely require a sizable allotment of your time. If you have any other questions or other issues regarding this report, please feel free to contact me at 952.847.9637 or on my cellular phone at 952.457.7639. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I look forward to hearing from you. INC. Natural Resources Specialist enc. cc: Ken Adolf, Schoell & Madson, Inc. Jason Palmby, Lundgren Brothers Mark Wilson, Barr Engineering Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer 10580 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 1 a Minneapolis, MN 55305-1525 111c"" Gle Office (952) 546-7601 9 Fax 1952) 546-9065 I Schoell & Madson, Inc. � m rvey • �.�..r e..�. JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND DETERMINATION AND DELINEATION Fox Property Chanhassen, MN Carver County Prepared for Lundgren Brothers, Inc. October 5, 2004 SMI Project 64000-276 Schoell & Madson, Inc. WANNER 1.0 Executive Summary ........ ................. ._ _..._......_.......... .................................................. 2 2.0 Methodology 3.0 Results and Discussion .... .......... ....................................... ....._......................... ..................................................... 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 s.L.Z.L W etiand s........................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2.2.D Welland 4 ..................... --..... - c 3.2.2.E Wetland 5 3.2.2.17 Welland 6 3.2.3 Soils........................................................................... 3.2.3.1 Mapped.............................................................. 3.2.3.1.A Wetland 1 ....................................................... 3.2.3.1.B Wetland ....................................................... 3.2.3.1.0 Wetland 3 ....................................................... 3.2.3.1.1) Wetland ....................................................... 3.2.3.1.E Wetland 5 ....................................................... 3.2.3.1.17 Wetland 6 ....................................................... 3.2.3.2 Observed............................................................ 3.2.4 Hydrology................................................................. 3.2.4A Welland 1 .......................................................... 3.2.4.B Wetland 2 .......................................................... 3.2.4.0 Wetland 3 .......................................................... 3.2.4.13 Wetland 4 .......................................................... 3.2.4.E Welland 5 .......................................................... 3.2.4.F Wetland 6 .......................................................... 3.2.5 Records Review................................. ---------- 4.0 Conclusion .... ......._.._................................................................................................................................_........_ 9 5.0 Qualifications 6.0 Literature Cited.................................................................................................................................................. 10 I 1.0 Ex-ECUTr--E St NENtARY Schoell and Madson, Inc. was contacted by Jason Palmby of Lundgren Brothers, Inc. to perform a jurisdictional wetland determination and delineation for the property known as the Fox Property. This property is located in Chanhassen, Minnesota south of the intersection of Lyman ' Boulevard and Powers Boulevard. The wetlands were field identified between August 25, 2004 and August 28, 2004. A review of aerial photography revealed eleven areas that presented with potential hydric indicators. Of these eleven areas, two of the areas were depicted on the Shakopee Quadrangle of the US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory Map as being entirely within the ' boundaries of the Fox property with a third basin extending on to the property. A copy of the NWI can be found in Appendix D. The soil survey for Carver County indicated that the majority of the soils on the property had at least one inclusion of a hydric soil unit. ' During the on site inspection, six of the areas were confirmed to be jurisdictional wetlands and their boundaries were delineated via the methodology described in section 2.0. That land that was not wetland was either forested or under cultivation of seed crops. 2.0 METHODOLOGY The wetland was delineated according to the United States Army Corps of Engineers Weiland Delineation Manual. 1987. A routine, on-site inspection was performed and transects were taken. The number of transect vaned for each wetland depending upon the size of the wetland ' and the diversity of wetland typology present. No less than one transect was performed on any basin discussed in this report. ' A list of resources consulted for the wetland delineation and subsequent report can be found in section 6.0 of this document. ' 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 WETLAND DESCRIPTION 3.1.1 Wetland 1 Wetland 1 is a Type 2 wetland located northeasterly on the property. The wetland is a ' depression with elevation increasing sharply in all directions. An eighteen inch F.E.S. inlet structure is located I the northeast comer of the wetland. Lyman Boulevard borders the wetland to the north. The eastern and n boundary is adjoined by a wooded hill. The ' remaining adjacent land use is cultivated corn. 3.1.2 Wetland 2 ' Wetland 2 is a large Type 2 and Type 3 wetland. Several areas along the perimeter of the basin are Types 6 and 7. A network of ditches has been constructed in the basin. This network eventually drains to the west to a large Type 4 wetland located on the adjacent ' property. This wetland is connected to Wetland 3 through a culvert under a field road. The upland area surrounding this basin consists nearly entirely of cultivated land. A review of 11 aerial photography indicates that until approximately 1980, most of the wetland was annually planted in seed crops. 3.1.3 Wetland 3 Wetland 3 is similar to Wetland 2. Were it not for the field road, they would be considered parts of the same basin. Combined, these two basins stretch from the northeast quadrant of the northern 40 acres to the southeast quadrant of the same 40 -acre parcel. The contributing watershed to these wetlands likely exceeds 70 acres although the exact size of the watershed has not been calculated. 3.1.4 Wetland 4 Wetland 4 is located in the southeast comer of the north 40 -acre parcel. It is a Type 3 and Type 6 wetland with a small portion that is forested. Historically the basin has been cultivated with the exception of that portion which lies within the windbreak. This disturbance is evident in the soils and the relative youth of the woody vegetation. It is also visible in the aerial photography review. 3.1.5 Wetland 5 Wetland 5 is located in the northwest comer of the southern parcel. It is a Type 2 and Type 3 ' wetland with a small pocket of sandbar willow located centrally along the southern boundary. It is surrounded by cultivated land on all sides. ' 3.1.6 Wetland 6 Wetland 6 is a Type 7 wetland with an area of Type 2 in the interior extending to the northern ' extent where the canopy opens. The basin has a relatively diverse species composition and several vegetative layers. A drain tile inlet was observed in the northeast comer of the wetland. There is some evidence of erosion around the inlet and a large gully located ' southerly in the basin. The topography of this wetland is such that the basin drains from north to south and some channelization is evident in the wetland. ' 3.2 SITE DESCRIPTION The site is approximately 91 acres in size. It is located in Section 23, Township 116N, Range 23W in Carver County, Minnesota. The topography consists of rolling hills with moderate to ' steep slopes with the wetland areas being located in the depressions between the hills or along the trees planted as windbreaks. There are no structures on the property and a majority of the land cover is cultivated crops. Both soybeans and corn are being grown on the property. The area that is not being cultivated is either wetland or forested. In some instances, both cover types are present concurrently. ' To the north, Lyman Boulevard borders the property. This is the only road frontage along the property. Adjoining properties elsewhere are either agriculture or, to the west, a large lot, single family homestead. I' 11 3.2.1 Topography The broad landscape generally decreases in elevation from north to south. On a smaller scale, the landscape is comprised of rolling hills with moderate to steep slopes. Elevation, on the site ranges form a low of less than 880 feet above mean sea level (msl) to a high point of greater than 950 feet above msl. 3.2.2 Plant Communities 3.2.2.A Wetland 1 Wetland 1 is a Type 2 (Wet Meadow) with a two small areas of Type 6 (Scrub Shrub) and Type 7 (Forested Wetland). According to the classification system developed by Cowardin, this basin would be a PEMB with inclusions ofPSS 1B and PFO1B. Vegetation observed at the sampling point included a thick mat of reed canary grass ' Phalaris arundinacea. The reed canary grass cover was greater than 100 percent of the ground in aerial extent. The overstory at the sample point consisted of black willow Salix nigra. Other plants observed in basin one, although not at the sampling point were boxelder ' Acer negundo, sand bar willow Salix exigua, stinging nettle Urtica dioica, and giant golden- rod Solidago gigantea. ' Upland vegetation was predominantly com Zea mays to the south and the west. To the north, the upland was Lyman Boulevard and the typical MNDOT seed mix associated with ' road right-of-ways. To the east, the topography sloped up abruptly. Vegetation in this area transitions to American basswood Tilia americana, American elm Ulmus Americana, and burr oak, Quercus macrocarpa. While the American elm and burr oak are adapted to live in ' wetter conditions, the abrupt change in topography was a good indicator that wetland was transitioning to upland. t 3.2.2.B Wetland 2 Wetland 2 exists has a relatively large contributing watershed. Although the exact area was not calculated for this report, a rough estimate would place the watershed at between 25 and ' 30 acres. A ditch has been excavated through the wetland at what is roughly the centerline of Basin 2 and Basin 3. There are also several perpendicular ditches contributing to the larger centrally located ditch. This basin is largely a Type 2 (wet meadow) and Type 3 (inland freshwater marsh) wetland with Type 5 (scrub shrub) and Type 7 (Forested wetland) wetlands located where the wetland narrows as it moves from east west. According to the Cowardin classification system this basin would be a PEMB and PEMC wetland with inclusions of PSSB and PF01B wetland types. Dominant vegetation located at transect 1 included boxelder Acer negundo and reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea. Subdominant plants included wild black currant Ribes americanum and stinging nettle Urtica dioica. All of the plants located at the sample point were facultative plus or wetter. Upland plants at this transect included common buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica, prickly ash, Zanthoxylum americanum, boxelder Acer negundo, burr oak Quercus macrocarpa, and garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata. With the exception of the boxelder, all of the plants located at this sample point were facultative minus or dryer. Another transect was performed at flag number ten. The community for this transect would be Type 6 or a PFO1B. The dominant plants identified at the wetland sample point included the following: black willow Salix nigra, boxelder Acer negundo, red -osier dogwood Cornus stolinfera. All of these plants are facultative wetland minus or wetter. The upland area for this transect was currently under cultivation. The crop cover was feed corn Zea mays. Also present was great ragweed Ambrosia trifida. While the ragweed is a facultative plus plant, corn is not listed and, therefore, has a non -indicator (NI) status. As the corn constituted 75% of the aerial cover and the ragweed was less than 20 percent, this area was determined not to meet the vegetation criteria for wetland determination. 3.2.2.0 Wetland 3 Basin 3 has a hydrologic connection to basin 2. A twelve -inch corrugated steel culvert ' flows under a field road between the two basins. It is likely that prior to the construction of this field road the two basins were part of the same lager basin. ' The plant community at this transect located at flag 3 was an ephemeral stream flowing through a type 6 (aka PFO1B) wetland. The dominant vegetation was a canopy composed ' of boxelder with an understory of reed canary grass. Other plants noted at the sample point included great ragweed and showy milkweed Asclepius speciosa. All of these plants are facultative plus or wetter. The upland sample point consisted of cultivated corn. A second transect was performed at flag 14. The plant community at this sample point was a Type 7 wetland with a relatively open canopy. The overstory consisted of boxelder. The herbaceous layer was comprised of pretty sedge Carex woodii, fowl bluegrass Poa palustris, reed canary grass, and wild black currant. All of these plants are facultative or wetter in habitat. The upland sample point consisted of cultivated corn. A third transect was performed at flag 14. This was an area that was plowed and planted but was currently denuded of all vegetation. Further into the interior of the wetland, the plant community was a Type 3 wetland that has been ditched. The Cowardin classification for this community is PEMCd. Like the last two sample points, upland vegetation consisted of corn. 3.2.2.D Wetland 4 Basin number 4 is located in the southeast comer of the northern forty -acre parcel. It is a wetland complex consisting of Types 2, 6 and 7 wetland communities. In the Cowardin classification system these would be referred to as PEMB, PSSB and PFO1B respectively. Vegetation observed at the wetland sample point included American elm Uhnus americana, boxelder, red -osier dogwood, reed canary grass, wild black currant, giant golden -rod and great ragweed. Other plants observed within the wetland included sandbar willow and narrow leaved cattail Typha latifolia. All of the plants were facultative or wetter. Upland plants were com. 3.2.2.E Wetland 5 Wetland 5 is a Type 3 (PEMB/C) wetland with a small Type 6 (PSSB/C) inclusion located along the southern wetland boundary. Vegetation observed at the wetland sample point included a dense layer of reed canary grass with a few sandbar willows. Also visible in the wetland was stinging nettle and great ragweed. The species composition met the criteria for hydrophitic vegetation. Upland plants consisted of soybeans. 3.2.2.F Wetland 6 Wetland 6 is a Type 7 wetland with an area of Type 2 where the canopy opens. The wetland has a diversity of plant species and several vegetative layers. Plants observed within the wetland included American elm Ulmus americana, black willow Salix nigra, red -osier dogwood Cornus stolinifera, burr oak Quercus macrocarpa, jewel weed Impatiens capensis, and reed canary grass. With the exception of the burr oak (FAC-) all plants were facultative or wetter. Upland vegetation to the north, south and east included cultivated soybeans. The upland to the west was marked by a sharp change in topography. Upland plants transitioned to American basswood Tilia americana, butternut Juglans cinerea, burr oak and prickly ash Zanthoxylum americana. 3.2.3 Soils 3.2.3.1 Mapped A copy of the soils survey corresponding to the area can be found in Appendix C. 3.2.3. LA Wetland 1 According to the Soil Survey for Carver County, the mapped soil unit at the location of Wetland 1 is Glencoe Loam. The hydric soil list for Carver County indicates that this soil unit is hydric in its entirety. 3.2.3.1.13 Wetland 2 ' According to the Soil Survey for Carver County, the mapped soil units at the location of Wetland 2 are Glencoe Loam and Palms Muck. The hydric soil list for Carver County indicates that both of these soil units are hydric in their entirety. 1 3.2.3.I.0 Wetland 3 According to the Soil Survey for Carver County, the mapped soil units at the location of Wetland 2 are Glencoe Loam and Palms Muck. The hydric soil list for Carver County indicates that both of these soil units are hydric in their entirety. 3.2.3. LD Wetland 4 According to the Soil Survey for Carver County, the mapped soil units at the location of Wetland 4 are Kilkenny -Lester Loams and Hamel Loam. The hydric soil list for Carver County indicates that the Kilkenny -Lester Loams have inclusions of Glencoe and Hamel. Both of these soils are hydric. The Hamel Loam is listed as hydric in its entirety. 3.2.3.1.E Wetland 5 According to the Soil Survey for Carver County, the mapped soil unit at the location of Wetland 5 is Glencoe Loam. The hydric soil list for Carver County indicates that this soil unit is hydric in its entirety. 3.2.3. LF Wetland 6 ' According to the Soil Survey for Carver County, the mapped soil units at the location of Wetland 6 are Terril Loam and Hamel Loam. The hydric soil list for Carver County indicates that the Terril has an inclusion of Hamel, a hydric soil. The Hamel Loam is listed as hydric in its entirety. 3.2.3.2 Observed Soils observed in the wetland pits were found to present with hydric indicators. Conversely, the soils in the upland pits were found to be lacking in hydric indicators although some presented with low chroma. In general, the soils were consistent with profiles typical for the mapped unit. However, given the land use, many of the profiles were observed to have been disturbed by cultivation. For a detailed review of observed soils, please see the attached data sheets. 3.2.4 Hydrology With the exception of two sample points, no hydrology was encountered in any of the sample borings. All were left open for no fewer than ten minutes, however, given that the soils tended to be heavy clays, it is conceivable that more time was required for capillary action to conduct water to the borings. Further, it is important to note the timing of the delineation and the effect this may have on water table elevations. Precipitation data was acquired form Station 211448 Chanhassen WFO from the High Density Radius Retrieval website maintained by the University of Minnesota, Climatology Department. Precipitation for the year to date totaled 32.62 inches. Average precipitation for the entire at this station is 30.44 inches. For the month of September, 5.40 inches of 11 precipitation was recorded at this station. This is 2.43 inches above the normal precipitation of 2.97 inches. This above normal month was subsequent to an August in which precipitation was 2.35 inches below normal. The net deviation from average precipitation for the two months preceding the delineation was plus 0.08 inches. This is statistically normal for this time period. 3.2.4.A Wetland 1 Although no hydrology was directly observed in transect number 3, three secondary indicators were observed. These indicators were oxidized root channels in the upper twelve inches of the soil profile, the FAC -Neutral Test, and recorded data on the local soil survey. Hydrology was assumed to be present at some point in the growing season based upon these three secondary indicators. Saturated soils were observed at a depth of eight inches within the wetland boring at transect number 9. In addition, several primary and secondary indicators were present. 3.2.4.13 Wetland 2 ' No direct observation of hydrology was made at transect number one. However, two primary indicators of hydrology and three secondary indicators were observed. Trees within the wetland area had widened buttresses and exposed roots. Channeling was also evident. ' Oxidized root channels were observed in the upper twelve inches of the soil profile. Other indicators included the FAC -Neutral test and local soil survey data. Similar evidence was observed at transect 10. In addition, drift lines of dried and matted leaves and grass were observed. 3.2.4.0 Wetland 3 No soil saturation or free water was observed in either transect of Wetland 3. However, several primary and secondary indicators of hydrology were observed. These included; water marks, drainage patterns, local soil survey data, and the FAC -neutral test. 3.2.4.1) Wetland 4 No soil saturation or free water was observed in either transect of Wetland 3. However, several primary and secondary indicators of hydrology were observed. These included; water marks, drainage patterns, local soil survey data, and the FAC -neutral test. 3.2.4.E Wetland 5 No soil saturation or free water was observed in either transect of Wetland 3. However, several primary and secondary indicators of hydrology were observed. These included; drainage patterns, local soil survey data, and the FAC -neutral test. 3.2.4.F Wetland 6 Saturated soil was observed at 14 inches. Although this is not within the top twelve inches of the soil profile, two primary and two secondary indicators were also observed. 3.2.5 Records Review No previous delineation reports were reviewed for this delineation. Historical Information ' Gatherers, Inc. provided aerial photograph coverage of the area. Aerial photographs from 1937, 1940, 1951, 1957, 1963, 1970, 1980, 1984, 1991, 1997, and 2003 were reviewed. The review did reveal some areas were apparent hydric footprints were evident. Upon inspection ' of these areas, it was determined that they were not wetlands because they were either fully supporting crops or they were located at a higher elevation on the landscape. ' Aerial photograph review did reveal that Wetland 2 and Wetland 3 were cropped in every reviewed year prior to the 1980 aerial photograph. However, a ditch is visible in every year reviewed. 4.0 CONCLUSION Based upon the presence of hydric soils and hydrophitic vegetation, coupled with the assumed hydrology, six areas have been delineated as a wetland. Efforts should be made during planning and construction to avoid impacting the wetland primarily and secondarily. The site lies within the Bluff Creek Watershed boundaries. Bluff Creek is within the Riley - Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District. According to the Wetland Conservation Act of 1996, wetlands on this site come under the jurisdiction of the Board of Water and Soil Resources. The responsibility for administering the provisions of this legislation is up to the local unit of government (LGU). In this case, the City of Chanhassen will oversee as the LGU. The project must be certified by the LGU as having complied with the provisions of the Act. Wetland impacts must be replaced or restored at a minimum ratio of 2 acres of replacement for every 1 acre impacted. These mitigation activities must occur within the same watershed as the impact occurs. The act also mandates that restoration or creation of replacement wetlands only be considered after an applicant has demonstrated that the impacts cannot be avoided, further inim mized, corrected, or eliminated over time. This requirement is essentially the same as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit process. During the final design process, effort should be taken whenever possible to avoid and minimize wetland impacts. By utilizing this approach, wetland replacement costs will be kept to a minimum and any additional permitting will be more easily facilitated. In addition, this strategy should result in a greater level of project acceptance 5.0 Q"LIFICATIO , Mr. Jeffery has been employed as an applied scientist of natural resources for over six years. He has completed over 200 wetland delineations throughout the upper Midwest. He has earned a B.S. in Natural Resource Assessment with a minor in Forestry form the University of Minnesota and a B.S. in Biology and Earth Science from Minnesota State University, Mankato. He has continued his education by taking the Basic Wetland Delineators course offered through the University of Wisconsin, La Crosse and the MnRAM training offered by the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources. 6.0 L1TERATV" CITED Some or all of the following sources may have been used in the research and compilation of this wetland delineation and subsequent report. • Britton, Nathanial and Hon. Addison Brown, An Illustrated Flora of the Northern United States and Canada.VI-III 2nd Edition Dover Publications, Inc., New York • Harlow, William M. et al, Textbook of Dendrology, 7d' Edition, McGraw Hill, Inc., ©1991 • Knobel, Edward, Field Guide to the Grasses Sedges and Rushes of the United States 2nd Edition. Dover Publications, Inc. New York ©1980 • Soil Survey Staff U.S. Department of Agriculture. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, Sixth Edition Pocahontas Press, Inc., Blacksburg, VA, ©1994 • Uva, Richard H. et al, Weeds of the Northeast, Cornell University Press ©1997 • Vance, F.R. et al, Wildflowers of the Northern Great Plains University of Minnesota Press, ©1984 • National Wetlands InventoryShakopee Minn., United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1989 • National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands• Minnesota, United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, May 1988 • Protected Waters and Wetlands Carver County Minnesota, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1983 • Wetland Delineation Manual, US Army Corps of Engineers January 1987 • Soil Survey, Carver County Minnesota United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Novemebr 1974 Appendices APPENDIX A Fox Property Site Map Microsoft Streets and Trips 2003 17 Lake Ann Park L` � offlldm- Blvd m or Lake �'_ `✓ ;' � 17 Susan UO La - I\ ice i Tri Bluff Creek Golf tl a 74 `�:, Association E'- Way D _1 11. 8earpa� �, L Lyman Blvd ey Eder +I Riley Lake :n 14 �5 1M f' Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineering • Surveying • Planning Soil Testing • Environmental Services Rice Lake Prepared for Lundgren Brothers Project Number 64000-276 APPENDIX B MN Department of Natural Resources Protected Waters and Wetlands Map Carver County Sheet 2 of 2 Prepared for — Schnell & Madson, Inc. Lundgren Brothers ProJeCt Numbs[ 64000-276 Engineering • surveying • Planning Soil Testing 9 Emirwrnental services I l r W APPENDIX C Fox Property United States Dept. of Agriculture Soil Survey: Carver County Minnesota November 1968 Prepared for ers Schoell & Madson, Inc. LuNumbBroffiber 6400000 -276 ® Engineering • Surveying • Planning Project Num Sol Testing • Environmental Services C IN kf Jt APPENDIX D National Wetland Inventory Shakopee, MN Quadrangle USFW 1959 rT 0 • PE' C� ;� C °EMFd r PSSKd IMP PEMCd •--PEQ PF -MC �90n. / PFoic„ PEMF� Approximate Site Boundary �M �a FL j PUbGx for — Schoell & Madson, Inc. Prepared Enginewing • Surveying • Planning LundgrenenBrothers Sod 7esGq • Ervironmentel Services Projed Number 64000-276 APPENDIX E Aerial Photograph Carver County USDA -FSA 2003 - Engineering • Surveying • Planning rwjucL n uyvvv-a iu Soil Testing • Environmental Services Appendix F Site Photographs 11 11 1 r 0 0 z m D y 1 O 0 f z D 1 m 1 r D Z O r 0 0 x z z 0 .Z1 -i 2 D m r n z v ►: r 0 0 z z Z O 1 2 m a m 1 D -i m r D Z v r 0 0 z c� z 0 1 x n n 0 y N f m 1 r D Z 0 0 r 3 D Z m r v P in, al r. Appendix G Data Sheets Schoell & Madson, Inc. ' Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Wetland Data Form Wetland Basin No. 1 Transect #: 3 Stake: 1W Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/2: ' Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 ApplicantlOwner: Lundgren Bros Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PEMB/C ' Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation ---- -------- Dominant Plant % Status Stratum Phalaris arundinacea 100 FACW 5 Salix nigra 35 OBL 1 1 Non -Dominant Piants % Stratum Ulmus Americana 10 1 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? 100% FAC or wetter Soils X On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon X Reducing conditions _ Organic streaking Histosol _ Sulfidic odor High organic content X Concretions Are the soils hydric? Yes Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation X Oxidized root channels _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks X Local soil survey data Sediment deposits X FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Drainage patterns in wetlands ' Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes: assumed based upon secondary indicators ' Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes ' Rationale for jurisdictional decision Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Sal Testing Environmental Services 10560 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: viz, Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 ApplicantlOwner: Lundgren Bros Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PEMB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant % Status Stratum Non -Dominant Plants ` % Status !9 Stratum Solida o Canadensis 60 FACU 5 Phalaris arundinacea 30 FAC ;' 5 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No Soils On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor High organic content Concretions Are the soils hydric? No Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators Inundation Oxidized root channels Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks Local soil survey data _ Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision None of three criteria present at sampling point. COMMENTS: Located 25 feet from shoulder of Lyman Blvd. Recently mowed and soils consist of fill material from road construction. Schoell & Madson, Inc. t Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Wetland Data Form Wetland Basin No. 1 Transect #: 9 Stake: 1W Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/2! ' Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Bros Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PEM/SSB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant% Status :- Stratum Non -Dominant Plants— °% s : StatuStratum Phalaris arundinacea 20 FACW 5 Polygonum pennsylvanica 5 1 FACW%' 1 Salix exigua 25 OBL 3 Scirpus spp 5 OBL 5 Ambrosia trifida 20 FAC+ 5 _ Vegetation Strata: 7 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? 100% FAC or wetter Soils X On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon X Reducing conditions _ Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor High organic content X Concretions Are the soils Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? Yes Depth to Saturation: 8" Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators Inundation X Oxidized root channels X Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves Water marks X Local soil survey data X Sediment deposits X FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary X Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision Three criteria present Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No ' Soils Depth (in inches)/Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Texture/Structure , 0-9 / Ap 10YR 4/2 Sandy Clay loam 9-18 / B i4tq5t9wil Clav NOMWI 1 On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor High organic content Concretions ' Are the soils hydric? No Hydrology ' Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA ' List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators ' Inundation Oxidized root channels Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary ' Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale ' Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No ' Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision None of three criteria present at sampling point. ' 1 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Wetland Data Form Wetland Basin No. 1 Transect #: 9 Stake: 2U Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/25/04 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Bros Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PEMB/C Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes , Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No ' Vegetation Do irem Plant % Status Stratum ,Non -Dominant PI"ants um Zea mays- NI 5 1 I Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No ' Soils Depth (in inches)/Horizon Matrix Color Mottle Colors Texture/Structure , 0-9 / Ap 10YR 4/2 Sandy Clay loam 9-18 / B i4tq5t9wil Clav NOMWI 1 On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor High organic content Concretions ' Are the soils hydric? No Hydrology ' Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA ' List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators ' Inundation Oxidized root channels Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary ' Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale ' Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No ' Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision None of three criteria present at sampling point. ' tSchoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services t 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Wetland Data Form Wetland Basin No. 2 Transect#: 1 Stake: 1W Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/2: ' Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Bros Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PFOB/C PEMB/C ' Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant % Status Stratum Non -Dominant Plants % Status <t Stratum Phalaris arundinacea 30 1 FACW 5 Urtica diioica 10 -FAC+ 5 Acer ne undo 60 1 FACW- 1 1 Ribes americanum 10 FACW 4 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? 100% FAC or wetter X On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon X Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content X Concretions Are the soils hydric? Yes Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other Feld evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators _ Inundation Saturated in upper 12 inches X Watermarks _ Sediment deposits X Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Is Wetland hydrology present? Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Rationale for jurisdictional decision Secondary indicators X Oxidized root channels _ Water stained leaves X Local soil survey data X FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Rationale Yes Yes: assumed based upon secondary and primary indicators Yes Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/2t Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Bros Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PFO1B / PEMB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plank s r :: 1 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Stratum Non -Dominant Plants - % Status:: Stratum Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 60 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 ' land Basin No. 2 Transect #: 1 Stake: 2U 40 Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/2t Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Bros Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PFO1B / PEMB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plank s r :: % `:Status= Stratum Non -Dominant Plants - % Status:: Stratum Rhamnus cathartic& : 60 IWACU = 3 Alliaria petialata 40 "`FAC 5 Acernegundo 20 1 FACW- 1 Quercus macrocarpa20 FAC- 1 Zanthoxylum americanum " 20 FACU+ 3 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; b = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No Soils TPYfi IrP/GtnlntnrP. On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon _ Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content Concretions Are the soils No Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators Inundation Oxidized root channels _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision None of three criteria present at sampling point. COMMENTS: Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 5467601 1W Date: 9127104 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: R1UB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation I Dominant Plant % Status I Stratum Non -Dominant Plants % Status Stratum '. Phalaris arundinaeea 80 FACAW 5 Ascte ias s eciosa 5 FAC Acerne undo 50 FACW- 1 Ambrosia trifida 5 FAC I Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? Yes Soils x On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content x Concretions ' Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA ' Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation ' Primary indicators _ Inundation Saturated in upper 12 inches ' X Water marks Sediment deposits x Drainage patterns in wetlands i� Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision 11 Secondary indicators Oxidized root channels Water stained leaves x Local soil survey data x FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary 1 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services ' 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 land Basin No. 3 Transect #: 3 Stake: 2U lethod Date: 9/27104 _ Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: RIIUB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Andra ogon gerardu 50 FAG- I b !, Zea mays 50 NI 1 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 0 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No Soils On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor High organic content Concretions Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation Oxidized root channels _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves Water marks Local soil survey data Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Ruuune vns¢e uetermination Method Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery VIY7/04 Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PFO1A/B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No uomnantrunt % I Status Stratum Norf-DominanfPlants % Status Stratum Carex sp. 40 5 Poa palustris 1 10 ' FAC 5 Acernegundo 80 FACW- 1 Phalarisarundinacea I 10 1 FACW 5 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? Yes Soils X On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol _ Sulfidic odor High organic content x Concretions Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation ' Primary indicators Inundation _ Saturated in upper 12 inches X Water marks ' _ Sediment deposits x Drainage patterns in wetlands Secondary indicators _ Oxidized root channels Water stained leaves x Local soil survey data x FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes — assumed based upon indicators Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services ' 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7801 Wetland Basin No. 3 Transect #: 10 Stake: Up Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/ Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PF01A/B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant Status Stratum Non -Dominant Plants % Status i Stratum Zea mays NI 5 Andropogon scoparius 40 NI 5 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? Yes Soils x On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon _ Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor High organic content Concretions Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation Oxidized root channels _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks x Local soil survey data. _ Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No -assumed based upon indicators Are Welland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Wetland Data Form Wetland Basin No. 3 Transect #: 14 Stake: Wet Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/27/04 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PEMB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes Is this a Problem wetland? Yes - area was planted but is currently tdenuded of vegetation Vegetation Dominant Plant Status Stratum Non -Dominant Plants I %% Status Stratum denuded 1 100 5 i Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No --area denuded of vegetation Soils ' x On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon x Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol x Sulfidic odor High organic content Concretions Sand has been deposited on the landscape since being planted ' Hydrology Yes - denuded of all vegetation Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation ' Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation Oxidized root channels _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves Water marks x Local soil survey data ' X Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary x Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes - denuded of all vegetation Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes - assumed based upon indicators Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes ' Rationale for jurisdictional decision 11 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services ' 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 j Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/27/04 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner. Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PEMB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? No Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes Is this a Problem wetland? Yes — area has been planted in corn Vegetation Dominant Plant % tatus Stratum ;;Non -Dominant Plants 6 I Status 1 Stratum Zea mays 75 5 i; Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No Soils Depth in inches)/Horizon I Matrix Color Gleying Mottle Colors Textute/Stmct re 0-9 1 Ap 10YR 413 Loamy clay 9-181 B 10 YR 513 Loamy clay _ On Hydric soils list _ _ Histic Epipedon _ Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content Concretions ' Sand has been deposited on the landscape since being planted Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation Oxidized root channels _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks Local soil survey data _ Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision 1 Schoell & Madson, Inc. ' Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Wetland Data Form WeOand Basin No. 4 Transect #• 1 Stake• at Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 91 t Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PEMB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant % Status Stratum Non -Dominant Plants I % Status Stratum ' Acernegundo 50 1 Carex so 20 5 Ulmus americanum 30 1 Cornus stolinifera 30 3 Vegetation Strata: 7 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? yes x On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content Concretions Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation ' Primary indicators Inundation _ Saturated in upper 12 inches ' — Water marks Sediment deposits x Drainage patterns in wetlands Secondary indicators _ Oxidized root channels _ Water stained leaves x Local soil survey data x FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes – assumed based upon indicators Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision 1 Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services ' 10580 Wayzata BIW. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 land Basin No. 4 Transect #: 1 Stake: Up lethod Date: 9128104 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community / Name: PEMB Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Strata: 7 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 0 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? no Soils On Hydric soils list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions _ Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content Concretions Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation Oxidized root channels Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves _ Water marks Local soil survey data _ Sediment deposits FAC -Neutral test definite vegetation transition at boundary Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 5467001 Wetland Data Form Wetland Basin No. 5 Transect #: 5 Stake: Wet Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 9/ Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PEM/SSI B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant % Status Stratum 'Non -Dominant Plants % Stratum Phalaris arundinacea 1 95 FACW 5 Urtica dioica 10 5 Salix exi ua 20 OBL ' ': 3 Ambrosia trifida 5 5 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? Yes X Local Hydric list Histic Epipedon x Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content Concretions Aquic regime x Gleyed/low chroma _ other ' Hydrology Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation ' Primary indicators Secondary indicators Inundation Oxidized root channels _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves Water marks x Local soil survey data Sediment deposits x FAC -Neutral test — x Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes – assumed Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services , 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 etland Basin No 5 Transect #: 5 Stake Up Routine Onsite Determination Method Uate: 91Zti1u4 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PEM/SS1 B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation eget Dominant and t °/o Status 1 Stratum Non -Dominant Plants % Sfatu "' Stratum i Sovbeans 80 5 Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? Yes Soils Depth in inches)/Horizon < Matrix Color Mottle Colors Texture/Structure 0-8 / Ap 71 4/3 Clay loam 8-19 / A2 10YR 412 Clay Yi Local Hydric list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content Concretions ' Aquic regime Gleyed/low chroma other Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators _ Inundation Saturated in upper 12 inches Water marks Sediment deposits Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision Secondary indicators _ Oxidized root channels _ Water stained leaves _ Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PF01 B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant % Stratum `Non -Dominant Plants % 1 Status. Stratum :.Salix nigra 40 1 Quercus macrocarpa 10 . FAC- 1 Uimus americana 30 1 Rubin_ 5 4 Phalaris arundinacea 40 5 x Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? Yes x Local Hydric list Histic Epipedon _ Reducing conditions Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor High organic content x Concretions Aquic regime x Gleyed/low chroma other Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA ' Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation Oxidized root channels Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves t x Water marks x Local soil survey data Sediment deposits x FAC -Neutral test x Drainage patterns in wetlands Exposed roots and widened buttresses Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes - assumed Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 91 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PEM/SS1 B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Dominant Plant % Status Stratum Non -Dominant Plants % Status 'Stratum Soybeans 40 5 Ambrosia tri6da 40 FAC+ - 5 Cirsium arvense 20 . FACU _-5—_ Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 40 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No Soils Depth in inches)/Horizon Matrix Color GI Mottle Colors Texture/Structure 0-8/ A 10YR 4l3 Clay -loam 8-19 / A2 10YR 4/2 Clay _ Local Hydric list Histic Epipedon Histosol Sulftdic odor _ Aquic regime Gleyed/low chroma Hydrology Reducing conditions High organic content other Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? No Depth to Saturation: NA Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators _ Inundation Saturated in upper 12 inches Water marks _ Sediment deposits Drainage patterns in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision Secondary indicators _ Oxidized root channels _ Water stained leaves _ Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test 1 Organic streaking Concretions ' I I Schoell & Madson, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 91 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PF01 B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100 Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? Yes Soils X Local Hydric list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions _ Organic streaking Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content x Concretions Aquic regime x Gleyed/low chroma _ other Exposed roots and widened buttresses. Soil saturated at 14 inches in late September. Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? ' Hydrology Is Wetland hydrology present? Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? Yes Depth to Saturation: 14 ' Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Secondary indicators _ Inundation Oxidized root channels Saturated in upper 12 inches Water stained leaves x Water marks x Local soil survey data ' Sediment deposits x FAC -Neutral test x Drainage patterns in wetlands Exposed roots and widened buttresses. Soil saturated at 14 inches in late September. Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Is Wetland hydrology present? Yes - assumed Are Wetland soils present? Yes Is the plant community a wetland? Yes Rationale for jurisdictional decision Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 91 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PFO1 B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vonatntinn Dominant Plant % Schoell & Madson, Inc. Stratum Engineers Surveyors Planners Soil Testing Environmental Services Salix nigra. 10580 Wayzata Blvd. Suite 1, Minnetonka, Mn 55305 (952) 546-7601 ' land Basin No. 6 Transect #: 12 Stake: Upland Ribes americanum 10 FACW ' 5 Routine Onsite Determination Method Date: 91 Field Investigator(s): Terrance Jeffery Project Number: 64000-276 Applicant/Owner: Lundgren Brothers Project Site: Fox Property County: Carver City: Chanhassen Plant Community/ Name: PFO1 B Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? No Is this a Problem wetland? No Vonatntinn Dominant Plant % I Status Stratum Non -Dominant Plants - % 1 Status ' Stratum Salix nigra. 25 OBL 1 Ribes americanum 10 FACW ' 5 Ju lans'cinerea 30 FACU+ 5 Tilia americana 30 1 FACU 5 _ americanum 1 35 FACU+ 3 Z=um Anemone uin uefofia J 20 FAC—, :; 5 ; Vegetation Strata: 1 = Tree; 2 = Sapling; 3 = Shrub; 4 = Woody Vine; 5 = Herbaceous; 6 = Bryophyte Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 30t Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteria met? No Soils Depth in inches)/Horizon J Matrix Color ; Gleying Mottle Colors Texture/Structure 0-3J A> "` 10YR 4/21 ! Loam 3-12 I B- r,` 10YR 5/4 Clay;loam Denied below 12" Local Hydric list Histic Epipedon Reducing conditions Histosol Sulfidic odor _ High organic content Aqui c regime Gleyed/low, chroma _ other Hydrology Is the ground surface inundated? No Surface water depth: NA Is the soil saturated? Yes Depth to Saturation: 14 Depth to free standing water in pit or soil probe hole NA List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation Primary indicators Inundation Saturated in upper 12 inches Water marks Sediment deposits Drainage pattems in wetlands Jurisdictional Determination and Rationale Is Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Is Wetland hydrology present? No Are Wetland soils present? No Is the plant community a wetland? No Rationale for jurisdictional decision Secondary indicators _ Oxidized root channels _ Water stained leaves _ Local soil survey data FAC -Neutral test Organic streaking Concretions I 1 U[mm O - Dmolr Rm umXmmt s.l • - pneln h ort fwnE - Dnaln BttumFeue $uyox m - D.noln Cmcele Suny.. -�-- Moln Smitory Sn. - D.OIx S\Om Bx. - MIPI« Y111nM - UYn1x P..ndYl - Dxplm (ioYtl Eb[bic 111.. - - Drdew aIle. IawXe rNMnm. Inw U - 0•x1« WF LHI F.x - Mxtr Wx 1Md F.x - Dnebe .dgll Yx F.w odp ale olu. DNFblee YhtM.d - Onota B"- j® L} - oxotr M.Idc� P. mw - Dnotr .. xpml M - Dnelx Ddl. Vdw M - Dnotn Loft Pd. ® - O.otn S.liNf, m - Bno1p Elc4k Ym.d. ® - Mloln Yols YaNW ® - D.d1w TN.pFdn. Yadd. (] - Dxotr Unbxm ..M. ® - D.lola Storm $ w YmtM. • - D.Iwn St.m o,lat m - o.xtx 4d. vex w® - DYwt« Oitrk TFmn.m. r® - D.xtw ENepk Y.t. • 9 - Dndtr sort Bd.F Ae - wxtr von X•dN.lw vm. UM, RM - DmolIf Slmd Plp •o - D.alx o,vd Pat o - Damn wa) Pd. M BVF9 - D.otr El-. Nord Yd. III - D- Is I.., Y.t. O - D.:tn T•.M SoIi Pd. • •d - D Itn EyMFq iPol D.wlim 1, TUP NUT WHY NT M Nw C NE W ULAN 9LW AND PONFRS BLVD AS 9fO ELEVATION -920.61 FEET (HCVD 1929). 2. UIYPIE OF S 1/4 (X)RNM W SEC 24 TOYM6NP 116, RANDS M A5 9mNN; E AT -68190 FEET (X419 1929). 1 D W T 1/1 COIiOER OF SEC A TOMl9W 116. RANGE 23 AS S : REVATION-WZ31 FEET (NM 1929). WGT'IOELL 9 Rph MON, M. ENWEZ7fs I SUBVET(m9 I RAI8mR9 =L TEM I DNI AL SEPNfFS _ 1f/.d0 XATIATA pQRYVA9m, R91E , ® MN&TD194A 9M 66108 I.,. (962) 696-]601 FA%(952) 698-900.5 ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY TNI. OYMIq M h••1 tl1erA90 ale mt 6,y a 9y JOB 8001( NUMBER: (136-34) nE1D BOOK: 646 PAGE. 29 N A E S vxm u�. Ills lw ••tr .> mY •AxtYlm mE Uql 1 laW s•N.sro ale. 8N b a Yln.,cl¢ IL •m.a�..x.. ®mmr.mrarrm,m��i Vli/���/-1�rr1�Aw�� rLmTATA-M,rV7,�, �tJi"� \�����mL��r�I���f������ ����L�•L•L� i tort. I, and/.. sxv �TW ..wr 1. Ldb..l . ..x.. Y .NI . nn m .91• .1 D.nl, �mn% Iw Nw.11.. L I- .1. .1mY 1M bw IF .YnwpP and M , A Fn M left L I- U d bn Fm Tr M. p.l U4 Y. wmIa Tn N.Ipul lyal. M q. SWUM oro1. INF L N Sll Y) N swLLn r.nlrT".. (v) Ttw 0 Ot. IAM.O spn«I (ne) x.a If Rmq. nnlrlNw ry) •wl ax tIM pIM d e. SmU Ipl y W smpwt W.lef If Scion v T-" rla M.IY R.N. v M. Fa.. Fnnt% IRmar flafOI YX. e. M.Ir dr w al..'i aw.•.e Ylef .ml«eNdn .•w aNefl1F...1 IJw of �SM�`b.M}JSbUlavv bn to I III't, a nm . m� If m 4qI..,. .] mlutn . b .11 t.l 1. ..aF< amw m wlwU If N <q... % M.W 11 .mC. b IPSro M In u FeFe an d 21 d.q� n M.olw le 1. 1 l t5x 11 M < p.Ft Ir vx�si mw,l.vwra 1. u.x MI.P.Ftm a. ..axe Sw 1A. m1 Omuol 1p a. swa 1, Ovt. iMw m m mYrvU N N oq.. a m.nl. M .""cwIf Wq W S"d'aml o�.`"a.'`.'I a'"�°ilwtef m ai. ms,d NI .1 t.�.e•1> n>) N.t b a. Ima.x •m.. d ..N But wwGIF9 11'ef.F.n 1n b.sFq rem.wy d w .mats a.x a swum v Td...b .la Raw v a.a ".�iR Xda m s.dlim o-. BwUw1. mrief .I S.aUm: tMn left M 1. WMSrU.cl mnef If W Sctlm .M tlw ✓n. d p.gnnFq III,, c X.w emief« Nq F Swats - of SnYm 21 i.Mb Ile. R.q ss < I• Fel iqm FTmnNM f.nC F a• mnnlMwl b UW Fv.x. pgn•X p) 51w.t TX. p.wl) SFT% M Vw 10Y11) .W ItPelb m1.0 NYup4 .Wga1 24 XV. w T.m AY., m] cw•.tl).on tln bn el i WFJM. xuabw n Fn.w".'b .YY. w wU TMO[ bwl a.• n. ry Metl• M'b W vy a .aMb w tl] GmbM pgefl) dM Yl.l YIIwi . MM F.vG tlM IM. .. w o.f1 �• . NiY memy.nnh n d. CeFx pm.ly oq�F�xb� v dM Yr �rx1. YWelma ea n Porn limm� w M.w ne1M Mas I X % mC Mn • n...�nl�nM W. Fe.wq m .mm Mm: Xwl a • . 1 m .e I ft (q F a:wOv...XA 1FFvn Sema N Ma R4.anb Iv uin/Ms Ime T P Suml•: %FV) W WI.M we 1.1 p) KTA AL1 m0 N9'B F 1MA W FWEw Ila• 1. 2a pu )(/q). M• . U.n' (a) Nvwy $l.ubb If wwfII I, KTM1 ..unmta: mi:rq:. ..a..eftaw aw Rw. nNa wma.ln. mw nl.taI Pa w.wal. oln.)....I.d aIfIII .e n .� m aa. I.aY aiwd.. to a... mXw F v. TA/A i 9.wy Yw..aeflb wiT fmbd IW B..x.1w 41•/•pl Lm orb .r n.q ,If,f Ona. a 2m. 0.1• d Mrd. x 31W GENWIft 1. F- I .b�I . F Fw P•gefU.. V.. W.I.d. IMI.d pU.NI• .N ilY.r A Fw .x left Lym Fm setts 0 U. Fm TnX PsrY O Mnin 2s-avP/m t ]}m]4%q M .w. dvYn YIY .am•mmL x Aed.« N w..tx brq.a. w .Nx m Nl. 1 F. q�ydpa d aY ...n% 1M Bma M1x If 1M Savawl Wet. N . A .. Ila RmB. xl M m n.Yg If 5 4N.e• E l tl. dr w Olml'I..� ly FpM.d aa1 a. pq.t) ..w w MY a my Y Y Fbq 2.1. c (.a N a. F"'�.e.d uF"me}wBef.r Y�m«.x"muie°ronrn m.rh a.�i. �•a.aw Na 2.1 mm-ama Pdwn.d er l rM I«.tl Fm.Bm.Y Y.xF.^ml M..l FpN. (m.FFYABn) Is YiaYd tlM M Pw.Ir nm m Yu. aq mw Im wt p.m mxp.d to Mcal. a IbM mw MIPaUw. S V Ws Yrs m ..n YW. uul) bvlby Irx 9. av) va Faaralbn w. M m.l. b.FB IM vlw.« d aY .I.Ir i Ian. ma �eY .uxb. ma/..p.IW« Ta Ywum a .'dlv.'Ix .txw mw ..r ra Ilwllev .wn I,..m .. d ma..ax .tRW and/. Nmx.r m,r r ..ant..a Fmlmt rcPN. sla a. T:w Mlltmltn vll. tmo) :sz-nee r. •.mwum If .mr Iw pb b m..ttn. 4 ax N prv.lx An4Sm b FL ). A}1x IY. ws b L.nm B.Maa ptic Xyit-aFaw n Ywin N rpiYB e.... ... I.mlen b, C... heft,} n rM MN al./ N UY .X..w wnN.bd w'Np.nM m 3LW. 14 IM wr If oxL.aat t- Yeavin tlwl M pq.lr Y a.nrr m'n .V (FPbd1W Fa1N.) ma T. gicN. tmYq •Mitt... ma UN u.. arY.l ..IWd .. - bM M � M Ra - 50 M F..dJ11md Ffam.IM al<M a. pbnFq dpMnt N a. Olr If 1. maefgw�d . I..n..a all.l... rllmw a. •m dM a r s d.«slml d aY ww.lx 1i T...mE. II to P11Fq rte. m w.: d (rMY. q Imdrypn d) IS TNI FFd C ftltl Ilan F Xt n rvmh to If INI -Pt,,,nt lUM4 [bc XI 21fBBe4 de. ort mama U. Pw.lx Id, pwvnml No SWJ2 Mtl F N.n ni..p 9 M tN. amApnml IL®IB M. M mwnp. tlx pq.lY TI. wl..,-t me fl S 1. xa 1. ef:alM W. 241%e i BN F Ir .- 1, .]l Y .NIFq w b Imglbn ma..b. Y nd dwm Part of the SW 1/4 of Section 23, Township 116. Range 23. Carver County. MN CLIENT 1 •,� p� /�Y�J�a�.�.�1t5��� t.YndgrMl Bra. CWWt JCtl0n m E Woytata Blvd Wayzata MN 55M N 1 F 1 S.M.I. PROJECT NO. 64000-276 /-W 1/4 Corner of SW 1/4, / Sec 43, Twp. 116, Rge 23. / Carvel, Co. Mon .0� (— — 'r I 3� N ONO a 7 O V) 1 1 (C.3.A.H I --------------- (------ - --------67.00, w aq LO d N WE�,f LAND I I I „m -Underground High Voltage Sign N. line of NE --- 00 ,e -•^ YJ ' E. line to 4 Q 1/4of SW 1/4.---, 00N I �L �i J i 6, . N w0 r� \4 vi I I I w Of N 4. �'Jy• �rn ¢ tK it s � Uj W =m mw En w ^ iU N J J N N �W o n Cp V) z LLI m 0* o ---473.23------- 22 .0^ 110 0 IN C) zit z Wil 0� I 0 v z II 2 I In a i ) m � 1004.18 - — — - ,' 3 I of SW 1/4. I ,' ,' V :I 2�Z5�/S88003'46"E COMI-O t � HOMES �( m \,_--S. Line of SW 1/4 l ---SW Corner of Section 23, of Section 23. Carver Co Mon U a i Z,\ �7 �� N88036'59"W 01325.63 e \.--N. N line of SE 1/2 ky (n of SW 1/4 Sec 23. u o m 0 S; o �a 3� N ONO a 7 O V) N8910'37"W 1317.18 _ �s7.00 LYMAN BLVD._ -r 1 1 (C.3.A.H No. 18 --------------- (------ - --------67.00, w aq LO d N WE�,f LAND I I I „m -Underground High Voltage Sign N. line of NE --- 00 ,e -•^ 1/4 of SW 1/4. E. line to 4 Q 1/4of SW 1/4.---, 00N I �L .- i 6, . N w0 o \4 vi -- W. line of NE 1/4y r--� of SW 1/ I I w Of N 4. �'Jy• �rn ¢ 1 it s � Uj W =m mw En w ^ iU N Cn N N �W o n 0 r V) z LLI m 0* o ---473.23------- 22 .0^ 110 0 IN C) zit z Wil 0� I 0 v z /�0 V J 2 I 1 i ) 1004.18 - — — - ,' i I of SW 1/4. I ,' ,' V :I 2�Z5�/S88003'46"E COMI-O t � HOMES i \,_--S. Line of SW 1/4 l ---SW Corner of Section 23, of Section 23. Carver Co Mon N8910'37"W 1317.18 _ �s7.00 LYMAN BLVD._ -r 1 1 (C.3.A.H No. 18 --------------- (------ - --------67.00, w aq LO d N WE�,f LAND I I I „m -Underground High Voltage Sign N. line of NE --- I ( ,e -•^ 1/4 of SW 1/4. E. line of NE Q 1/4of SW 1/4.---, O I �L I Imo' i Z N w0 o Oo vi -- W. line of NE 1/4y r--� of SW 1/ I I w Of N 4. �'Jy• �rn ¢ I I Q it s � Uj c ` =m mw En w y Q Z ~O Cn * * �W o n 0 r V) z LLI m „�"„s2 ---473.23------- 22 0 C) zit z Wil 0 00 L0 0 v J /�0 V J 2 I i ) S. line of NE 1/4 I of SW 1/4. I I I 4 zz_ 1173.46 588003'46"E (Az=91 °56'13") ,-NE Corner of SW / 1/4, Section 23. "- .. J 4„ I \ 475.40 Meas. \ S88036'59"E \_--N. line of SE 1/2 (Az=91°23'02") of SW 1/4. (Desc=457.37) ON LA O O "p N to W W J �4V ��0 _ ry (V 4, 2` W V O O FN X X X tij X(D XQ �. CL W X °° X z Y Y O O O 0m M 0 M 0 _W S E 200 0 100 200 400 mommot— (SCALE IN FEET ) ---NE Corner of S 1/2 of SW 1/4, Sec 15. DETAIL A 1” 30 FT. A ?�, I 30.00 �\'� \ � +cFA? '> O I 30.00 I SW Corner of the SW 1/4 of Sec 23, Twp. 116, / Rge 23. Carver Co. Mon \ (STONE) / I I I I — — (Az=271056'13") 1634.23 — — _ • — — N88003'4E"W S 1/4 Corner of Sec. 23. Carver County Mon. w aq LO d N 1 M 0 C)ay z „m ^ GO Z m z O 0 z W QN Q 1 1*0 b7 "- .. J 4„ I \ 475.40 Meas. \ S88036'59"E \_--N. line of SE 1/2 (Az=91°23'02") of SW 1/4. (Desc=457.37) ON LA O O "p N to W W J �4V ��0 _ ry (V 4, 2` W V O O FN X X X tij X(D XQ �. CL W X °° X z Y Y O O O 0m M 0 M 0 _W S E 200 0 100 200 400 mommot— (SCALE IN FEET ) ---NE Corner of S 1/2 of SW 1/4, Sec 15. DETAIL A 1” 30 FT. A ?�, I 30.00 �\'� \ � +cFA? '> O I 30.00 I SW Corner of the SW 1/4 of Sec 23, Twp. 116, / Rge 23. Carver Co. Mon \ (STONE) / I I I I — — (Az=271056'13") 1634.23 — — _ • — — N88003'4E"W S 1/4 Corner of Sec. 23. Carver County Mon. 0 WLO 1 0 o 0 m L O aha CS z W QN inNLn 1 1*0 O U �L Z :Z LO o Oo vi > LO N Q 0 9Z" oo m ¢ F-- it s vz c ` =m �o w y Q Z ~O Cn * * �W o n 0 r V) z LLI m o- w N 0 C) zit z Wil 0 00 L0 0 v J /�0 V J 2 I i ) 0 WLO o o w0 5 rn aha CS z W QN inNLn 1 1*0 O EL Z :Z LO Oo rn W �2 > LO N Q } 0 9Z" oo m ¢ O oN it s mQ W o �o w y Q Z ~O = * * �W o n 0 r V) z QZ 3 m o- w N It C) • z Wil 0 00 L0 0 z J_ 04 u7 W ) rD U " N O O 0 It O z I- 0 W 3 5 Concept Plan Fox Properties City of Chanhassen, MN CITY OF CHANHASSEN RECEIVED NOV 0 5 2004 CHANHASSEN PANNING DEPT Gross Ac. 94.55 Ac. MN'.DOT R.O.W. 14.50 Ac. Net Developa.ble.Ac 74.05 Ac. Open Space 25.60 Ac. 4-Plex 136 Units Rowhomes 192 Units Total 328 Units Scale: l "-200' North November 5, 2004 0:\4000\4100.18\110504concepts.cdr