Loading...
Wetland Delineation Report June 2011Wetland Delineation Report 1000 Park. Road City of Chanhassen Carver County, Minnesota Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 238N St. Paul, MN 55114 June 2011 ❑ Klmley- -Horn and Associates, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report for 1000 Park Road City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota Contents ExecutiveSummary .................................................................................................... ............................... ii SiteLocation ................................................................................................................ ..............................1 ProjectDescription ...................................................................................................... ..............................1 Purposeof Delineation ................................................................................................ ..............................1 SiteDescription ........................................................................................................... ..............................1 PreliminaryInvestigation ............................................................................................. ..............................1 FieldInvestigation ....................................................................................................... ..............................2 WetlandCharacteristics ............................................................................................... ..............................8 RegulatoryRequirements ........................................................................................... .............................10 ReportPreparation ..................................................................................................... .............................11 References................................................................................................................. .............................12 Figures Figure Project Vicinity ............................................................................................ ..............................3 Figure2— Project Study Area ........................................................................................ ..............................4 Figure USGS Topographic Map ................................................................................ ..............................5 Figure 4— Delineated Wetland Boundaries .................................................................... ..............................6 Figure5— Wetalnd Area Types ..................................................................................... ..............................7 Appendices Appendix A — National Wetlands Inventory Appendix B — Hydric Soils Information Appendix C — Precipitation Data Appendix D — MN DNR Public Waters Inventory Appendix E — Field Data Sheets Appendix F —Site Photos KHA Project No. 116199062.1.140 Copyright © 2011 Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc., shall be without liability to Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 1 1000 Park Road June 2011 ❑ ❑ IGmley -Hom and Associos, kic. Executive Summary Wetland scientists Beth Kunkel (CWD #1084) and Ashley Payne (CWD -IT #5104) with Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. conducted a wetland investigation and delineation for the 1000 Park Road site in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota. Field reconnaissance was performed on October 20 1h , 2010. Based on the field evaluation and review of available background information, the following findings /conclusions /recommendations are made: • Two wetland areas were determined to be wetland; • ' Area A met the federal definition of wetland. o Area A was classified as a Type 6—Shrub-Carr Wetland. Area A was located west of the parking lot and east of Area B. • Area B met the federal definition of wetland. o Area B was classified as a Type 2 — Fresh (wet) Meadow and Type 6 — Shrub -Carr Wetland. Area B was west of Area A and west of the side parking lot of the existing building. • The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) should review the delineation to determine whether the identified wetlands are jurisdictional (i.e., Waters of the United States). • If construction activities are proposed within any of the identified wetlands, approvals /permits from the ACOE, MnDNR, and /or Local Government Unit may be required. Coordination with these agencies should be conducted prior to construction. • Best Management Practices (BMPs) for erosion and sediment control should be implemented during and after construction to protect the quality of the wetlands. The BMPs should be outlined in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Wetland Delineation Report II 1000 Park Road June 2011 a IGmley -Horn and Associates, kic. Site Location The Park Road site is located south of Minnesota State Highway 5 and west of County State -Aid Highway (CSAH) 17(Powers Boulevard) in the City of Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota (Figure 1). The project is located in Section 14, Township 116 North, Range 23 West. Project Description The project site at 1000 Park Road is currently being considered for redevelopment as a retail center. The project study area can be found in Figure 2. Purpose of Delineation This delineation is intended to identify the extent of wetlands within and adjacent to the site. The information will be used to facilitate site design and to determine if wetland impacts are avoidable and /or if minimization of impacts can result from design modifications. Site Description Land use within and adjacent to the project area included commercial, roadway right -of -way and undeveloped property. Essentially, the site is a parcel developed on the east side with a commercial building and adjacent parking lot and to the east side The ground surface elevation of the study area ranged from 1030 feet to 1052 feet above sea level. The topography is generally flat and mostly developed. Preliminary Investigation Prior to field reconnaissance, potential wetland areas within the project area were identified through review of National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping, aerial photography (2009), site topography, and the soil survey for Carver County. NWI mapping, maintained by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, shows one wetland within the study area (Appendix A). The Shakopee, Minnesota 7.5- minute topographic map (U.S. Geological Survey) shows a blue line which indicates there is a channel running through the project study area and two purple hatched spaces which identifies two excavated ponds near the project study area (see Figure 3). According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service's (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, one soil mapping unit within the project area was considered to be hydric (Hamel Loam). Maps and information obtained from the NRCS online soil survey are included in Appendix B. Precipitation data for the project vicinity were obtained from an online data retrieval system, created and maintained by the Climatology Working Group at the University of Minnesota (available at http: // climate .umn.edu /doc /historical.htm to determine the wetness conditions in the surrounding area. Rainfall levels for the three months (July, August, September 2010) leading up to the field investigation were compared to historical data. The comparison indicates Wetland Delineation Report 1 1000 Park Road June 2011 ❑ Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. that all three months had "wetter than normal" conditions. The precipitation data can be found in Appendix C. The Department of Natural Resources Public Waters Inventory Map (PWI) was reviewed. One public water was identified on the inventory map. This public water is a stream that flows in the southwestern corner of the study area. The Inventory Map is included in Appendix D. Field Investigation Wetland scientists, Beth Kunkel (CWD #1084) and Ashley Payne (CWD -IT #5104) with Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA), conducted a field investigation and delineation on October 20 2010. The weather was generally clear and sunny. No rainfall fell during the week prior to the delineation. A routine level 2 wetland delineation, as outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (ACOE) along with the Midwest Regional Supplement was performed. Vegetation, soil, and hydrologic characteristics were evaluated at each potential wetland area within the project study area. A transect, including at least one upland sample point and one wetland sample point, was completed and documented for each wetland area. Wetland boundaries were flagged with numbered pin flags where one or more of the three criteria were no longer present. The flag and sample point locations were surveyed and are shown in Figure 4. The field data sheets are included in Appendix E. Wetland Delineation Report 2 1000 Park Road June 2011 1000 Park Road � m� NORTH Wetland Delineation Report Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. 0 500 1,000 Figure 1. Project Vicinity Feet = =„ 1000 Park Road NORTH Wetland Delineation Report Nimicy -Horn and Associates. Inc. 0 150 300 Figure 2. Project Study Area Feet I f r f J fff�� U a`+"'4- .:r r `J�• •�` „1^�C r , } ! rt L �[r� t r Lak Ai .......... j I z 10 �\ .�.�� �, � � ! -,/�, -�-. L_ - l • -,�/.` r_:.�:. j � J �'r _ �+�' .�, jiir rf +�(��f1 ` • t f f � . r' l � `. .r � /J' � •:S '� i (/� _ S� i ��• . .. . * "t�.� .� !i j r� � s �- -- f' t..- �'`` --• � _ l�, / fit,_ ,� - ".�- 1 PROJECT STUDY AREA �, 1.f �.f., i '.: �f,� {+ ��' - �`^•. _ —.r � �'� r i . ..���\.I' —� 1 Uri a 10 Susan I � * f Ij Jr J� f \ :�.;. %�' / 7��'� J� 1 �_. � ''^ « *��- F_•j *y ( C]s ��� 5j \•� `"._ 1000 Park Road ` =�� NORTH Wetland Delineation Report 0 500 1.000 Figure 3. USGS Topographical Map - Shakopee Quadrangle Kimley -Horn and Associates. Inc. Feet Legend - ( • .\ � tip.. Delineation Flag Locations • Sample Point Locations ? + Delineated Wetland Boundary 1 �► i { V t .� T• i �'• t. AR r , �• a ,1 , ,tom' , a }�• ��'�'. "',• � M } ; fi r �frf � r ,� �- r AR�_ -11 ►. + f t�rf _ .{ ..u, ,� ) " �a �' 1 ��t' I �:. 17"�"T -�� � t?�; �� �t1•ti�ia, " f ,r PARK ROAD [ =� 1000 Park Road NORTH Wetland Delineation Report Kimley -Horn and Associates Inc. 0 50 1 00 Figure 4. Delineated Wetland Boundaries Feet A & 1000 Park Road ��F, NORTH Wetland Delineation Report Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. 0 s0 100 Figure 5. Wetland Types Feet C 2 M" Il H om fllll� and Associades, kic. Wetland Characteristics The field investigation identified two wetland areas within the project study area; these boundaries are described below. The wetland boundaries, as flagged and surveyed, are shown in Figure 4. The field data sheets are included in Appendix E. Area A: Wetland Area A was. located western edge of the back entrance road to the existing (west) side parking lot (Figure 4). This area is a ditch area /storage pond with steep bank slopes on all sides of the wetland. Two old weir structures were abandoned within this basin. Area A was not identified on NWI, but was identified as having hydric soil (Hamel Loam). Dominant vegetation within Area A at sample point A -N -1 included box elder (Acer negundo), black willow (Salix nigra), smooth sumac (Rhus glabra), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). Other notable hydrophytic vegetation found within the wetland area was giant goldenrod (Solidago gigantea), blue vervain (Verbena hastata), and a smartweed species (Polygonum sp.). The vegetation within the upland area adjacent to Area A (sample point A -N -2) had a dominance of box elder, smooth sumac, reed canarygrass, and burdock (Arctium minus) which was not considered hydrophytic vegetation. The soil within the wetland area met the field indicator of F6 (Redox Dark Surface). Hydrology within the wetland area was determined by saturation (A3) at 13 inches and by drainage patterns (610), and geomorphic positions (D2). Eleven flags were placed around the perimeter of Area A. The wetland boundary determination was generally based on the steep changes in topography (steep bank slopes) and changes in vegetation from reed canary grass and black willow to sumac and burdock. Area A was considered a Type 6 — Shrub -Carr wetland (Figure 5). Area B: Wetland Area B was located along the western edge of the property line (Figure 4). This area is in a low topographic position with steep slopes on the northern, eastern, and southern sides. Area B has a DNR public water channel flowing through the southwestern corner of the parcel. To the west of the parcel and Area B, two created stormwater ponds area present. Area A and Area B share the same upland area so A -N -2 was used as the upland point for Area B. Area B was identified on NWI as PEMC, and was identified as having hydric soil (Hamel Loam). Dominant vegetation within Area B at sample point B -N -3 included reed canarygrass which was considered hydrophytic vegetation. Other notable hydrophytic vegetation found within the wetland area was blue vervain, sandbar willow (Salix exigua), green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens), and narrow - leaved cattail (Typha angustifolia). A second wetland sample point was used to determine the wetland boundary along the south side of the property. The dominant vegetation at this point included Canada goldenrod (Solidago canadensis) and Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) which was not considered hydrophytic. Wetland Delineation Report 8 1000 Park Road June 2011 a © Iftley4in and Associates, tic. The soil within the wetland area met the field indicator of F6 (Redox Dark Surface). Hydrology within the wetland area was determined by oxidized rhizospheres on living roots (0), and saturation (A3) (at 22 inches, but assumed to get within 12 inches of surface during spring). Thirty flags were placed around the eastern and south sides of Area B. The wetland boundary determination was generally based on the changes in vegetation from reed canary grass to Canada goldenrod and changes in topography. Wetland flags B -1 to B -8 along with flags B -20 to B -24 were along the side channel flowing through the site, with B -1 to B -3 and B -25 to B -30 along the DNR Public Waters channel. Area B was considered a Type 2 — Fresh (wet) meadow, and a Type 6— Shrub -Carr (Figure 5). Wetland Delineation Report 9 1000 Park Road June 2011 a —o Kffnle - and Associates, kic. Regulatory Requirements The following provides a general summary of the permit requirements that may pertain to the 1000 Park Road Project site. Any activity planned within areas identified as wetland must be coordinated with and approved by the appropriate agencies prior to commencement of such activities. Agencies representing three levels of government in Minnesota regulate certain activities that affect lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands: • Federal — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE): Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. • State — Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR): Public Waters Work Permit Program. • Local — Local Government Units (including cities, counties, watershed management organizations, soil and water conservation districts, and townships): Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The City of Chanhassen is the LGU for this site. The WCA applies to nearly all wetlands not regulated by the MnDNR. The regulatory authority of the ACOE generally covers Waters of the United States, including those that are regulated by the MnDNR or subject to WCA. Generally, the ACOE reviews delineations to determine whether wetlands are jurisdictional (i.e., Waters of the United States). In Minnesota, a joint application process has been developed for projects with anticipated wetland impacts. Applications are coordinated between the ACOE, MnDNR, and Local Government Unit. Wetland Delineation Report 10 1000 Park Road June 2011 ❑ Nmley-Horn and Assmi0s, Inc. Report Preparation The procedures followed for this wetland delineation are in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (ACOE 1987) .and the Midwest Regional Supplement (ACOE 2010). This report describes site conditions for a specific date -in -time, and is generally valid for a period of three years from the date of the field investigation and delineation — October 20, 2010. Wetland Delineation Report 11 1000 Park Road June 2011 IGmley-Hom and Associles, Inc. References Climatology Working Group, University of Minnesota. Historical Climate Data Retrieval. Daily or Monthly Temperature, Precipitation, Snow Data by Target Location. Available at http:H climate .umn.edu /doc /historical.htm, accessed October 2010. Minnesota Climatology Working Group. Historical Climate Data Retrieval. Wetland Delineation Monthly Precipitation Data Retrieval from Gridded Database. Available at http: // climate .umn.edu /doc /historical.htm, accessed October 2010. Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. Information regarding Minnesota wetland regulations (includes links to other regulatory websites). Available at http: //www.bwsr. state .mn.us /wetlands /index.html, accessed October 2010. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Protected Waters and Wetlands, Carver County, Minnesota. Public Waters Inventory Map. Available at http: / /www.dnr.state.mn.us /waters /watermgmt section /pwi /maps.html, accessed October 2010. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available at http : / /websoilsurveV.nres.usda.gov, accessed October 2010. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y -87 -1. January 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0). August 2010. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Wetlands Online Mapper. National Wetland Inventory mapping. Available at . http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html, accessed October 2010. Wetland Delineation Report 12 1000 Park Road June 2011 Appendix A National Wetlands Inventory Appendix B Hydric Soils Information Hydric Rating by Map Unit — Carver County, Minnesota 44° 51'56' 44° 51'20" 44° 51' 56" 44° 51' 20" U SD Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1011112010 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 5 m Map Scale: 1:5,360 rf punted on A size (8.5" x 11 ") sheet. M in (V N Meters 0 50 100 200 300 ^ N Feet m 0 200 400 800 1,200 m O N C C_ T C 0 U a� Z M U 'c D CL T m c U Z O G O LL Z a Q w (0 O O ° N N m C m E m m L C m ° M Z a) N 3c:`0 N U U O C t9 U 3 L ca C Z m T U O C 'O Cl) CD C E E L N D O O m U) C 7 LLI Q O N — Y • O m E — O` _ U w N L O x E m a) Z>c`' U) U m �` �ww LO N co 00 N 0 Z N O O O O " z U U E N W C d O G� Q 7 N J O C N C O O L_ 3; m N N U Q E L ) Z N 0 (n � N O_ @ C N N N Q Q � 0 N O) C Q O C:, c O > O c 7 °30 L 3 = c0 o c4 d E o N ° N aNinnl Eo° a) Uc .2 2 n N Nm m 0 N E CL E v L m D •o ? a� m a L E .Q U N ? N cam m> 3 N m _ m m U ° L m c o O M 'L"' L N Z = N a) —_ V1 c6 m O N O •� U') N ,L.., C N N N T O) N N M N m E O� T 7 (a O 2 O O m ` 7� U Q m N O " L L C w ... N N E U) O — m C 1 0. 0 O` Z m O_ m C L .0 ° O N N j to N O O C 'O O_ N 7 T (n N jo 'C _� n O m CL a� am 7no > ? —Z N m a�EmE 2 F a E cn C F - w � cn o F- ° E o w (0 C) cn 00 0 N m O d (U Z U) • O Zu) 7 — m 0 o_ n o m 0 c 0 m Z d U cn Z d N = C O � O Q' m L 7 N A O Z U 8I Z6 > N 0 C Z N N U U O C t9 U 3 L W C C = T U O C 'O C c0 0 = r «� V O co cc LLI Q ca w cc 2 'V = Y l0 N N N N d Of U) O �p EL N Q O cn N N O C m¢ a z 7 C O O " z U ` U O in C C J Q C C G LL 0 C LL O 0 G O ,- - _.... r CL ` _ -- •Q H O cc a a 3 F C) cn 00 0 N m O d (U Z U) • O Zu) 7 — m 0 o_ n o m 0 c 0 m Z d U cn Z d N = C O � O Q' m L 7 N A O Z U 8I Z6 Hydric Rating by Map Unit —Carver County, Minnesota Hydric Rating by Map Unit Hydric Rating by Map Unit— Summary by Map Unit — Carver County, Minnesota Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI CW Cordova- Webster complex All Hydric 3.9 3.2% Glencoe clay loam All Hydric 3.1 2.5% GL HM Hamel loam All Hydric 24.3 19.8% KB Kilkenny- Lester loams, 2 to 6 Not Hydric 16.4 13.4% percent slopes KB2 Lester - Kilkenny loams, 2 to 6 Not Hydric 14.0 11.4% percent slopes, eroded KC2 Lester - Kilkenny loams, 6 to 12 Not Hydric 26.2 21.3% percent slopes, eroded KD Lester - Kilkenny loams, 12 to 18 Not Hydric 3.1 2.6% percent slopes KD2 Lester - Kilkenny loams, 12 to 18 Not Hydric 6.8 5.5% percent slopes, eroded KE2 Lester - Kilkenny loams, 18 to 25 Not Hydric 3.8 3.1% percent slopes, eroded KF Lester - Kilkenny loams, 25 to 40 Not Hydric 0.5 0.4% percent slopes ND3 Lester - Kilkenny clay loams, 12 Not Hydric 18.0 14.7% to 18 percent slopes, severely eroded NO Lester - Kilkenny clay loams, 18 Not Hydric 1.8 1.5% to 25 percent slopes, severely eroded PM Klossner muck All Hydric 0.7 0.6% Totals for Area of Interest 122.6 100.0% t'S Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/11/2010 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 5 Appendix C Precipitation Data High DENsity radius retrieval 071210 'Closest Station' Climate Data Retrieval The data matching your request is at the bottom of this page or should appear there within one minute. Target location is Lat: 44.85556 Lon: 93.55160 set location F retrieve only this station: 1211448 CHANHASSEN WFO years: 2010 -Ito F2010 - number of missing days allowed per month: I retrieve data from the following data sources: F 71 Precipitation from High Density Network F Precipitation from National Weather Service F_ Temperature from National Weather Service F Snow from National Weather Service get monthly get daily Target: lat 44.85556 lon 93.55160 mon year cc tttN rrw ss nnnn 00000000 pre aaaaaa Jan 2010 211448 .55 Feb 2010 211448 .87 Mar 2010 211448 1.14 Apr 2010 211448 2.99 May 2010 211448 3.03 Ju n 2010 21144 7ul 2010 211448 ug 2010 211448 n6.91 se 2010 211448 Oct 2010 211448 1.99 Nov 2010 211448 1.87 Dec 2010 211448 2.91 Page I of 1 Tmx Tmn aaaaaa sno SnD dis 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. Where indicated: Missing values are shown as 'm'. Days on which precip accumulated in the gage are shown as ' -'. 'TTTT RR SS' is the 'public land survey(PLS)' or 'legal' location of the observed data. Section values greater 36 are SECTIC 'TIC' locations plus 100. 'NWS ID' the National Weather Service Cooperative station number. Note that the 'PLS' will always be correct for precipitation data while the 'NWS ID' will always be correct for the temperature data. If no PLS info is supplied the the 'NWS ID' number applies to all shown data. r t o retri selection State Climatology Office - MnDNR - Waters, 1996 -2002 You can send e -mail to the State Climatology Office . http: // climate .umn.edu /HIDradius /radius.asp 5/12/2011 High DENsity radius retrieval 071210 Aug 28, 2010 0 Aug 29, 2010 0 Aug 30, 2010 0 Aug 31, 2010 .41 Sep 1, 2010 0 Sep 2, 2010 .75 Sep 3, 2010 .06 Sep 4, 2010 .01 Sep 5, 2010 0 Sep 6, 2010 0 Sep 7, 2010 .20 Sep 8, 2010 .01 Sep 9, 2010 0 Sep 10, 2010 T Sep 11, 2010 .28 Sep 12, 2010 0 Sep 13, 2010 0 Sep 14, 2010 0 Sep 15, 2010 .14 Sep 16, 2010 .91 Sep 17, 2010 .01 Sep 18, 2010 .05 Sep 19, 2010 0 Sep 20, 2010 0 Sep 21, 2010 .57 Sep 22, 2010 0 Sep 23, 2010 1.26 Sep 24, 2010 1.69 Sep 25, 2010 0 Sep 26, 2010 .02 Sep 27, 2010 0 Sep 28, 2010 0 Sep 29, 2010 0 Sep 30, 2010 0 Oct 1, 2010 0 Oct 2, 2010 T Oct 3, 2010 0 Oct 4, 2010 0 Oct 5, 2010 0 Oct 6, 2010 0 Oct 7, 2010 0 Oct 8, 2010 0 Oct 9, 2010 0 Oct 10, 2010 0 Oct 11, 2010 0 Oct 12 2010 0 Oct 13, 2010 0 Oct 14, 2010 0 Oct 15, 2010 0 Oct 16, 2010 0 Oct 17, 2010 0 Oct 18, 2010 T Oct 19, 2010 0 ct 2u, Zulu u Oct 21, 2010 0 Oct 22, 2010 0 Oct 23, 2010 0 Oct 24, 2010 .41 Oct 25, 2010 T Oct 26, 2010 1.18 Oct 27, 2010 .32 Oct 28, 2010 .08 Oct 29, 2010 0 Oct 30, 2010 0 Oct 31, 2010 0 Nov 1, 2010 0 Nov 2, 2010 0 Nov 3, 2010 0 Nov 4, 2010 0 Nov 5, 2010 0 211448 5.96 211448 1.99 211448 1.87 Page 5 of 7 0 mi. 0 mi. 0 mi. http: / /cIimate.umn.edu /HI Dradius /radi us, asp 5/12/2011 Appendix D MN DNR Public Waters Inventory �i t Y . ,;�� K I ' f t,f ,? L f I r e •.�•. . . __ � �' .. r te. I it - l Y . . `. ;� ��` -"_; _.a., + �.=`.J yl��.•. y P 1 • ,� 111 � � � Jr ■� � ' ^¢ � �. .. i r� '!� ~� + J � _ awtiry i! � I ' It_ y � 1 1 `` � ` �- • +' `I �•� ��� k - PROJECT STUD YAREA l to At _ -' r te , J � r I �` �'___ � l � t , •, f 'r �� . _ 'y` � ♦ t � 4l' - ' , /,: �i ( j ` _ 1 V / � } ( may •! i f r ! , . q .. r - ( �` I ! t t� - �'` . } - 1� � r- `�� ' _ ♦ .qi¢I' -." F �, I ' �.} . "mil, 1 • • ''tom j !� • ,• f r t t /,' .�� �i' ,/'- yr:'��a'r''� + r �_; � ,'�� �._ ���� ►_ 1 � .. ,r t � , ; �' j� �f * j r r"� tt; si■ j1 p'T", ` �..t - �_ -�` � -- __ r' � - tt �f j, f / #� � � V "li ,f i ��. .j` i _� �. ,tom �t• � + `�� �r t{ � � -`t � I t I `•�' � _ .� ! ! : J.�\ • Ir I �t7 J fr fi '�_. r • � 'r A J. ,r — ; "' ! '- � �'Yf• • Te t • 1 F • � , '' , . r r 't- NORTH 0 500 1.000 DNR PUBLIC WATERS INVENTORY Feet WETLAND DETERMfNATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region F' ProjectrAe: _QW F2a i- Dt2..i _ citylCounty: LA (Ass N1 Sampling D 1012-0 f Appficant/Owner. State: M ki Sampling PoinL &Z (� - Invesf&gator(s): h k.4V OA, dNai 11%4 RLA4 nf- Section, Township, Range: 14, - r 116N, 12 -2ZVV tandform kVislope, terrace, etc.): Local refief (concave, convex, none): Slope ('Ay. .. Lat: Long: - -- -- Daiwa: Sail gap Unit Name: U VY vE=1 . l C?CA NVi classification: N ' I. N Are arnafiC f hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes - A — No of no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation . SOD or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are `Normaf Circumstances' present? Yes - _X,_ No Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Rarnarfts.) SUMMARY OF FfNDINGS - Attach site map strewing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytio Vegetation Present? Yes No Dothfnance Test Worksheet. Hydric Soil Present? Yes No is the Sampled Area v Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes ^ No Remarks: 3, t t Y, v, i er a1A !� X_ VEGETATION -Else scientific names of plants. US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region -- Version 2.0 Absolute Dominant Indicator Dothfnance Test Worksheet. Tree tratum (Plot size: 20 fl- j °/ Cover es? St_ airs Number o Dom inant Species 1. A„ eAa. i ra Lxkmct o 10 X - 6 �W That Are OeL, FACW, or PAC: — 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant LF Species Across All Strata: (g) percent of Dominant species 2. Ptl - �, t A i tAS IY2&,V In L4 l0 iCi.e S . �� - f f",_ 3, t t Y, v, i er a1A !� X_ 4. S. ThatAra 08L, FACW, or PAC- (AB) — 2 � =Total Cover Saplj ffl Shrub Stratum (Plot size: Prevalence Index worksheet: I. �� S�ft.t k � S �___ U PL_ TOW % Coyerot. Multiply bVc OBL species X1= 2. ' 3. FACW species - _ x2= FAC species x3= 4. 5 FACU species x4 �3 Total Cover UPL species x 5;; Herb Stratum (Plot size: �- ) V _ Column Totals' (A) (B) i . Plr��alz S (waft lAtMl - Gl Le01 _AO _ _ Prevalence Index = B /A= 2. U & a cA16CIA t () f y�yy 3. Ve-1140 haLrcA a 2- JACAW Hydrophytic Vegetationlndicatom. _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytfe Vegetation _42 - Dominance Testis >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is c3 .0' 4 - Morphological Adaplafions (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 4. S'd } p, y�{{ 5 _ _ F jy�l - �tc�. 5_ t 1 ern O CAA t/khO�CJ� �� S I O F!'C s. POI -1 !�A dv'% tAVll-1 Sp- I C) 7 13. _ Problematic Hydrophytc Vegetation' (EKplain) = Total Cover 'Indicators of hydricsoil and wetland hydrology must be 1 _ WgWy Vine Stratum (Plot Size. ) present, unless disturbed or probternatic. Hydrophytic vegetation Present? Ye!. No 1. 2. Total Cover —X — Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region -- Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point —1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matra Redox Features PdmarY Indicators (minimum ofone. €s required finches? Coax (moist) % Color fmcisll _ Tvne I oc� L_*M Remarks t�' S i Q`I a t 100 _ Surface Soil Cracks (s&) s� Gi 10 S -1 10`10 - l Go ���{� -S S _ �— Si c,S i �Y�(�yy� } med PRA2f . 1 - 1 J_ 10\4 SII.5 so 10 20 ® U (0 `r I 1 - 2-1 N ' 0 Water Marks (81) (0 EgAnd 1e64� Type. C =Concentration, D lion RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains. kocation: PL =Pore Lind M-tvt dx. Hydrie Soit tndicators: _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) indicators for Problematic Hydrfc Salts': _ Hfstosol (Al) — Sandy Gleyed IMafmc(S4) _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) _ Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Sandy Redox (S5) ^ Darts Surface (S7) _ 13fack Hisfic (A3) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) — iron- Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loamy Mucky Minerat (F1) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Stratified Layers (A5) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Other (Exp€ain in Remarks) 2 rm Muck (A10) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Water Fable Presenl? Yes No Depleted Below Dark Surface (At t) X, Redox Dark Surface (176) Saturation Present? Yes X No Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 'Indicators of hydrophyficyegetabon and Sandy Mucky Mineral (81) _ tZedox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must he present, _ 5 as Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or problematic ' Restrictive Layer ( €f observed): TYP @= A l0-1� � •f':r Hydric Soil Present? Yea_ No Depth (inches): .. Remarks: erect HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology indicators: PdmarY Indicators (minimum ofone. €s required check al! L1 1$noht) _ _ Secondary )_nd ccaaiors (minimum of two reauired) _ Surface Water (Al3 _ ftter- Stained Leaves (139) _ Surface Soil Cracks (s&) High Water Table (A2) _, Aquatic Fauna (8 13) Drainage Patterns (1310) )C Satur*Uoo (A3) _ True Aquatic Plants (814) , Dry- Scason Water Table (C2) Water Marks (81) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) _ Crayfish 8tRy -WA (C8) Sediment Deposits (8?) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on LWng Roots (C3)' _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (09) _ Drift Deposits (83) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) _ Algal Mat or Crust (84) _ Recent iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Geomorphic Position (D2) _ Iron Deposits (85) — Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ FAC-Neulrat Test (D5) Inundation Visitile on Aerial imagery (67) ^ Gauge or Well Data (09) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) ^ Ether (explain in ReerA tom) Fwtd Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No_ Depth Qnches): Water Fable Presenl? Yes No Depth (inches) Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): l3 i ' Wetland. Hydrology Present? Yes j —, No includes uta frl Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous irispections), if available, R l iha�G G y2%�.0� I I �1L1�5 gt'21��KYl 1/�/f'�f cw�c( ci.U1. ->vC%� � A l0-1� � •f':r tca�►sCCA v� ��5 TD Pty- .. erect US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region -Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Midwest`. Region 6 Proje.VSitw 10M ._PMAw - KZl t/ P C1fy /C0unty: C&V n SIC ,Zfy) Sampling DaW za rf l Applicant/ Stale: M l Sampling Point A imesfigatar {s): �1.Cif`1C -Q_L, j ��� Section, Township, Range: I�P:i14 Landform (hillsiope, terrace, elc,J: Local relief (concave, convex, none): CQVI CU,U` Slope (%,), Lat . Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit ►Same t" r0, m•C C- L-LQCXM A4Wt class cation , I�17 N Are cifmatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical For this time of - year? Yes _)� _ No (IF no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Solt or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are `Normal Circumstances." present? Yes_ No Are Vegetation . Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important: features, etc. Hydrophyttc Vegetation Present? Yes No - N Hydric Will Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Welland Hydrology Present? Yes No _)p vhthin a wetland? Yes . No VFaETATION —Use scientific names of plants. US Army Corps or Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2,0 Absolute Dominant Indicator Oo0ifnance Test wotksheet: Tree Stratum (plot size: ) ° Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 2 1. "Ah"Xd' o That Are Off, FACW, or FAC: (A) Z Total Nurnber of Dominant 1 3. Species Across All Strata F (B) 4. percent of Dominant Species 5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: CA(B) ;F;0_ = Total Cover Prevalence index worksheet: SapiinglShrub Stratum (Plot size: H5 1. �s�ta S r•! I {� {pryt t 5(� _ _ ILM L Total % Cover al: _ - _- Multiply by` 2. OBLspedes Q x 3 = FACW species x 2 3. d FAG specie _ Y3= 6 FACU species xb = Total Cover UPL species f , 1 t 'J Herb Stratum (Plot s i ze: Column T4lats: (A) ( E4 �,� � (B) 1. sa�o �t°Y7ltfll�CA IF5 g w B.GB 2 +r�taia 3s �ia2�av,�.�v,uc 4o x. Ear Prevalence Index =B/A= 3. -4Q1r- - t' �i A YY� t(Y l 11tJ�S 45 X M91 Hydrophyttc Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophyttc Vegetation 4 — _ 2 - Dominance Test is >5016 B � _ _ _ 3 - Prevalence index is s3.0 � 6. 4 -Morphological Adaptations` ( Support ing 7. _ data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) $• Problematic Hydrophyttc Vegetation' (Explain) s. 10. z , ^ I = Total Cover 'Indicators of hydric soil and Welland hydrology must (F ! be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody VineStratum (Plot size, ) 1. Iiydrophytio Vegetation Present? Yes No X 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps or Engineers Midwest Region - Version 2,0 SOIL Sampling Point: >4 - N Z Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or pontirm the absence of indicators.) Depth tv)&X Redox Features _ Surface Watetcl) {inches) Color (moist) % Color moist Type Te du em Remy ks L_ 0 ZOQ Drainage Patterns (810) S t o - 1 Z 10 - 1 16 ' -�— .14DIPE 2 '.G 2-0 _C_ Si cA { Hydrogen Suffide Odor (C1) I 04ilL ro L 8 _ > S1i C4 to +� hoi.nr i .n e of H s i -��caF 3 D 1 O` tP_ 31 I S ib . Si <A In Presence of Reduced iron (Cd) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Gust (134) 'Type: C= Concentration D =De letlon. RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains. Location: PL =Pore LInIn , M= Matrix. Hydric Salt Indicators: 'thin Muck Surface (C7) Indicators for Problematic Hydrie Soils : _ Histosol (Al) — Sandy Gieyed Matrix (S4) _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) ___. Hisfic Epipedon (A2) _ Sandy Redox (S5) — Dark Surface (S7) Black Histie (A3) _ Shipped Matrix (S6) _ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) — Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) _ Very Shallow Darts Surface (TF12) ,-,_ Straidied Layers (A5) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ 2 Gm Muck (A10) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Saturation Present! Yes _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1) V Redox Dark Surface (176) includes capillary fringe _ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) "Indicators of hydrophyfic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (81) Redox Depressions (178) wetland hydrology must be present, _ 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) 00 s�� .r. S l h- td+rzo4V�J`� PY2,eSgt.,^ $. unless dWurbed or problematic Restrictive layer (if observed): _ Type. Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes. No Remarks: SO I L.S c.0vN'1 r C HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology 1pdi R Primary Indicators (mini -mum ofone Is reouired: check all that apply) Secondary indicators (minimum of two re ulm ) _ Surface Watetcl) _ Water - Stained Leaves (139) _ Surface Soil Cracks (66) High Wafer Ta a (A2) _.._ Aquatic Fauna (613) Drainage Patterns (810) _ Saturation (A3) + True Aquatic Plants ($14) ` Dry- Season Water Table (C2) _ Wafer Marirs (61), =y Hydrogen Suffide Odor (C1) Crayfish Burrov s (CS) Sediment Deposa�"2) _ Oxid Rhiaospheres on Living Roots (C3)' — Saturation Visible on Aerial. imagery (C9) _ Drift Deposits (83) Presence of Reduced iron (Cd) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Algal Mat or Gust (134) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Geomorphic Position (D2) Iron Deposits (65) 'thin Muck Surface (C7) _ FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _ Gauge or Well Data (09) _ SparsetyVegetated Concave Surface (138) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Held Obseivadorw Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (Inches): Water Table Present? Yes Na Depth (inches): Saturation Present! Yes No •._, Depth (Inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No includes capillary fringe Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring Weil, aerial photos, previous inspections), if avallabtw Remarks 00 s�� .r. S l h- td+rzo4V�J`� PY2,eSgt.,^ $. US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region -Version 2.0 . 1 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -- Midwest Region { A". ProjeCMte: , 1 GM Q- C32-1 yt✓ CitytCounty: Sampling Date 1012 � I .r � AppticanttOwner. - - - '� J State: ON Sampling Point 13;- N'N--; r — , I mesti s ator G • I -Wry J: 1 J 9 (� �--t ----mod � Vl , Section, Townshi R a ng e: tr t y �' . p. ang � i fandfomr (hillstope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, honey CAZinCa te Slope VA . _ _ _ - Lai: long: Datum: Soil map Unit Name: WWI classification: prW6 Are climatic f hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of Yes -y No (if no, explain in Remarks,) Are Vegetation . Soh or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal C,rcumstano present? Yes No Are Vegetation . Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transeots, importantfeattums, etc- Hydroptryft Vegetation Present? Yes No Dertifnance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 .. (A) Total Number of Dominant Spades Across Ail Strata: (8) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Hydric Soil Present? Yes _ No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes-X No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes - , No _„ ... Remarks: 2, 3. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: IFO ft ) 1, Absolute Dominant Indicator as Cover Suedes? Status Dertifnance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 .. (A) Total Number of Dominant Spades Across Ail Strata: (8) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 2. = 3. 4. 5• SapurtglStjrub_Stratum (Plot size: _ `� I Q_. =Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Covet of IUluNioly bv: 081- species x 1 = FACW species x2= FAC species X 3 = . FACU species x4= UPL species x S T Column Totals: (A) ;8) Prevalence Index = BtA = 2, 3. 4. 51 =Total Cover Herb Sfiratum (Plot site: S C-4- ) 2 iGt�.l t x W� GI tR - V`P.Y 1T 10 3. LAQ-- 1CCA C* l CGl 5 ` Hydraphyttc Vegetation Indicators: _ 1- Rapid Testfor Hydrophytie Vegetation ;X 2 - Dominance Test is ?W. _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 0.0'" _ 4 - Morphological AdoptationO (Pr4yide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic HydtophyUc Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydiic, soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.. 4 5 13. r_ e 9: 10. x • i Woody Ving,Stratum (plot size: ) 1. i = Total Cover Hydrophytfc Vegetation Presont? Yes No 2 =Total Cover Remarks: (include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 71 2 �--?�� rC S ioi-r v. } -1 jr� I n W ��ot A.t'"Oi Vle- V =tX1 YCA t to I aJ (2 -e��n (�aL,� { rLt� S In t I�YY�fJ. {. t CCA- q (ja lor'25 CVNCtAn y\t-Q- n -e r US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region -Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point - N - 3 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matra Redox Features all that apply) Secondary—Indicators fmlnlmum of two reaulredl finches] G OIoi f[n0[St) ° Color lmaisil ^ y4_ TMe Loe Texture Remarks Aquatic Fauna (Si3) Drainage Pattems (Bi 0) _ Saturation 03) _ True Aquatic Plants (614) • _ Dry Season Water Table (02) E2� +I I04 -2r( °t3 - 7-6 ; e CA to hc&d.4:&;U, Qekfized Rhizospheres on Living moots (03)' _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (Cg C, f :I O (mow hylk, Ct rs{jy_ 'Typw. C= Concentration, D =De letion RM- Reduced Matrur, MS= Masker€ Sand Grains. 'Location: PL =Pore Unin , M= Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC- Neutral Test (D5) Indicators for Problematic Hydr1c Sof e. _ Histosot (Al) Sandy Gleyed Matrix. (SO _ Coast Prairie Redox (A96) Histic Epipedon (AZ) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ Dark Surface (S7) Black Histic (A3) _ Stripped Maimt (86) _ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Mucky Mineral (Ft) r Very Shallow Dark Surface tTF12) _ Stratified Layers (A5) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) Depleted Mat& (173) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available; T Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al t) Redox Dark Stirface (F6) 1nycJ(iryc3 �4SS�- w� �[rA � Ocxv ►�^wy- Thick Dark Surface (Al 2) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ; Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Depressions (178) wetland hydrology must be present, _ 5 an Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) unless disturbed or pmEifematic Restrietttve Layer (if observed). . Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yea No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology indicators: Primary indicators fmlniriwm of one is romired check all that apply) Secondary—Indicators fmlnlmum of two reaulredl _ Surface Wafer (Al) _ Water Stained Leaves (88) _ Surface Soil cracks (86) High Water Table (A2) ^ Aquatic Fauna (Si3) Drainage Pattems (Bi 0) _ Saturation 03) _ True Aquatic Plants (614) • _ Dry Season Water Table (02) _„- Water Marks (8i) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Ct) Crayfish Burrows (C8) _,__ Sediment Deposits (82) ,-•_, Qekfized Rhizospheres on Living moots (03)' _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (Cg Drift Deposits (B3) — Presence of Reduced Iron (G4) '. _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (0 1) Afgal Mat or Crust (B4) — Recent Iron Redaction in Titled Soils (C6 Geon phie Position (D2) _ Iron Deposits (BS) — Thin Muck Surface (C7) FAC- Neutral Test (D5) _ Inundation Visible 6n Aerial Imagery (B _ Gauge or Well Data (Dg) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BS) ` Other (Oxpiain in Rentadts) Field Observations', Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (Inches): Water Fable Present? Yes Na X Depth (inches): 8aturaflon Present? Yes Y. Na Depth (inches): 2.-2 Wetland- Hydrology Present? Yes No ncfudes wpillnE ffl e Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available; Remarks: V�142_ VN C.1/�cR V�VLR.Q. '�' rr S. (�`� �Wl SG.VYlp-C. (Do1vcl 1nycJ(iryc3 �4SS�- w� �[rA � Ocxv ►�^wy- V\_ ! ivy 12 'I US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest: Region ProjeJSitw -t V W F D a lye Cityicormty: ►)ct� Sei1F1 Sampling Dafe: �1 Z0_= Applioanttowrner: ' _... state: N A rJ Sampling Point: is - N — `t imresagator(s} g ll—(Ji tf1 r4e.L i �1 �� Section, Township, Range: SSG. t � � T I (Dn Laru form (hillslope, terrace, etc.); Local relief (concave, convex, none); r Jtn� Slope (%): Let; Long: Datum: Sots M8p Unit Name' 4 sO�V)'- lu V1n N. WI clansdtcatibn Are dmatic f hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes I— No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstanced° present? Yes-K-- No Are Vegetation . Solt or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site trap showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. A Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Y Hydric Soil Present? Yes No is ttte Sampled Area. Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Remarks: VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute % Cover Dominant Indicator Species? Status RoMinaneeTestworf(sheer i. S::L�x - Number of Dominant Species That AreOBL, FACW, orFAC. 2-_ (A) 2 • - - Total Number of Dominant 4 -1 3. Species Across All Strata: (B) 4' - percent of Don inant Species 2- L 5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A!B) =Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet: SaolinggShrub Stratum (Plot size: 16F+ _ ... 4.. tZl 116 G 1C? 1,oi2 -C'k 1 �;_ --.c- UPI- Total % Cover of Multiply by: OBI-species _ 5 x I= 5 2 3. FACW species 1.2 x2 = 2, 't 4. FAC species - 1 0 5 x 3 = 22 FACU species - 70� x d = , UPL species S X5= 2 6 Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size ) Column Totals: (A) r u {B) 2. SI 1 L q�' <) Prevalence index = BIA= Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytia Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is a50% 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0" _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide Supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3. ��Ll1pGLr�� Cwt V�CI��I�_ 4. �c�� )( /�'� 5_ _�1Q�t C Q f/Zlrl Y�!_lt V1Uf t'Ll 2 1= 7. 8" Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 9 10. Total Cover Indicators of hyd6c soil and we0and hydrology must Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: f=I- ) be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 1. kydrophytic 2 Vegetation Total Cover present? Yes No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region -- Version 2.0 Sampling Point F N Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or oonfirm the absence of Indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features Primary agdicators_(minfmum of one is reouired check i es Color (rvioist) °!a Color fmoisii % one Loc Texture, Remarks 0 t• O \1 (9- 21 .— G • (. C)Ct i t� _ 10 1 NJ 24 0 100 _ Drainage Patterns (B10) Q._ True Aquatic Plants (814) - _ Dry Water Table (C2) 2-0 — 26 0` V 2 Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Type* C =Concentration D =De letton, RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains, z Location: PL =Pore I3nln M =Matrix. Hydria Soit Indicators: _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Indicators for Problematic Hydrie tolls . _ H istosol (Al) Sandy Gleyed Matrix, (S4) � Coast Prairie Redox (A1S) _ Flistic Epipedon (A2) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ Dark Surface (S7) _ Brack Histic (A3) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) — Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (PI) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TS=12) _ Stratified Layers (A5) V Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) _ 2 cm Muck CAI 0) _ Depleted Matrix (173) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Ai 1) — Redox Dark Surface (F6) _ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) — Redox Depressions (F8) wetland hydrology must be present, _ 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) (includes capillary fringe) unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (i€ observed): –___ Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), if available: Remarks: Type- Depth (inches); Hydric Soil Present? Yes NON Remarks col tc t'u,nrt OW-- it tme, p►�ese.t - HYDRO LOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary agdicators_(minfmum of one is reouired check ail. Iha t ap91V) Secondary Indicators (rtyrtimum of iwo re wired} Surface Water (Al) _ Water- Stained Leaves (B9) _ Surface Soil Cracks (86) _ High Water Table (A2) Aquatic Fauna (BI 3) _ Drainage Patterns (B10) V Saturation (A _ True Aquatic Plants (814) - _ Dry Water Table (C2) _ Water Marks (81) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) — Crayfish Burrov49 (Ce) Sediment Deposits (B2) _Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (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 (C6) _ Geomorphic Position (D2) _ Iron Deposits (85) — Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ FAC- Neutral Test (D5) _ inundation Visible on Aerial imagery (87) ,_,_, Gauge or Wen Data (D9) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (13$) ^ Othe r (5xpla7 in fn Remarks) Field Observations: Surmce Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table present? Yes No Depth (inches); Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Welland Hydrology Present? Yes Ncr (includes capillary fringe) –___ Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0 Appendix F Site Photos Wetland Flag B -25 facing southeast. `t Appendix F Wetland Flag B -25 facing west 6 a f f )6 Wetland flag B -8 facing northeast. Appendix F At sample point B -N -3 facing east. Appendix F DNR Public Waters Channel (on- site). At Sample Point A -N -1 facing south. At A -1 facing north. At B -12 facing northwest. Appendix F