D-1. 9641 Meadowlark Lane Wetland Alteration Permit & VariancePROPOSED MOTION:
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve Wetland
Alteration Permit #2016-04 and authorize the Water Resources Coordinator to sign the
Interagency Water Resource Application, subject to conditions within this staff report, and
adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Recommendation."
And,
"The Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,
approves a variance to encroach 70 feet into the required 100 -foot shoreland setback from a
tributary stream, as shown in plans dated January 6, 2016 to construct a driveway, subject to the
conditions of the staff report, and adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Decision."
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Wetland Alteration Permit for the
construction of a driveway in order to access the property, as well as a variance to allow them to
encroach on the required setback from the tributary stream on the property to achieve a driveway
alignment that would avoid further wetland impacts.
LOCATION: 9641 Meadowlark Lane (PID 25-7420070)
APPLICANT: David Vogel
105 Pioneer Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
PRESENT ZONING: Rural Residential (RR)
2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential Large Lot
ACREAGE: 2.5 Acres
DENSITY: NA
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-
MAKING:
Variance — The city's discretion in approving or denying a
Variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project
meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance.
The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a
variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from
established standards. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 2 of 16
Wetland Alteration Permit — The city's discretion in approving or denying a Wetland
Alteration Permit is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards outlined in the
Zoning Ordinance. If it meets these standards, the city must approve the wetland alteration
permit. This is a quasi-judicial decision.
Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting a Wetland Alteration Permit under Chanhassen City Code, Chapter 20,
Article VI, Wetland Protection, and approval of a wetland replacement plan under the MN Wetland
Conservation Act for the construction of a proposed driveway to access the property at 9641
Meadowlark Lane.
The applicant is also requesting a 70 -foot shoreland setback variance from a tributary and a
wetland alteration permit to construct a driveway. The subject property is currently vacant, but
will be developed for a single-family home in the future. The applicant is requesting the
proposed variance and driveway alignment in order to avoid additional wetland impacts.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
Chapter 20, Article IV, Conditional Uses: Wetland Alteration Permits follow the Conditional
Use Permit criteria
Chapter 20, Article VI, Wetland Protection
MN Rules Chapter 8420.0500 through 8420.0526
Chapter 20, Article VII, Shoreland Management District
Section 20-481, Placement, design and height of structures
Chapter 20, Article II, Division 3. Variances
David Vogel, applicant and property owner, is requesting a wetland alteration permit for wetland
impacts as a result of a proposed driveway construction at 9641 Meadowlark Lane. Currently,
there are no structures present on the property. The intent of the proposed project would be to
provide an access to the property and allow the construction of a future residence. Currently the
only access is a mowed path that utilizes the neighboring property's existing driveway (See
Figure 1 below). The parcel was platted as a residential lot with Riley Lake Meadows and filed
as a lot of record in 1988.
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 3 of 16
Figure 1. Existing Access
In order to accommodate the project, the applicant is proposing to impact 957 square feet of
Wetland Basin 1, as shown in Figure 2 below.
Proposed Wedind In"d
B`.7 SF
(Yellan =611
Figure 2. Wetland Impacts
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 4 of 16
The applicant is also requesting a variance from the required 100 -foot minimum setback from the
tributary stream that flows from the south through the property to Lake Riley. This alignment
would avoid wetland impacts to Wetland Basin 3 (See Figure 3 below).
Figure 3. Wetland Boundaries
There are three wetland basins on site.
Wetland 3 is an isolated basin on the eastern
border of the property. A portion of Wetland
Basin 1 runs parallel to Meadowlark Lane,
making impacts to this wetland difficult to
avoid when providing access to the property.
City Code requires driveways serving unsewered lots to be setback 100 feet from the ordinary high
water level of tributary streams.
Section 20-484 (b) of City Code states:
"Roads, driveways, and parking areas shall meet structure setbacks and shall not be placed
within bluff and shore impact zones, when other reasonable and feasible placement alternatives
exist. If no alternatives exist, they may be placed within these areas, and shall be designed to
minimize adverse impacts. "
Given the location of the tributary stream, and the dimensions of the lot, providing access would be
extremely difficulty without encroaching into the required setback. The proposed project encroaches
70 feet into the required 100 -foot tributary stream setback for unsewered lots.
The proposed 9641 Meadowlark Lane driveway project consists of the construction of a 12 -foot
wide bituminous drive from Meadowlark Lane extending into the property approximately 350 feet
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 5 of 16
(See Figure 4 below). The project will provide access to the property and accommodate proposed
future construction of a single residence. This request is to address the driveway that will serve
this property. The applicant has not submitted any plans for a residence or potential future
location of the structure. Any future structures and plans for such must meet ordinance setback
requirements. There appears to be adequate buildable area on the site that will allow the property
owner to build a single-family home.
Figure 4. Proposed driveway alignment
Wetlands within the proposed project area were delineated in October of 2015 by Jacobson
Environmental Consulting. The delineations were reviewed on site by city staff in November of
2015, and the boundary was approved by the City of Chanhassen on November 20, 2015. The
delineation identified three wetland areas on site. The Interagency Water Resource Permit
Application for wetland replacement dated January 4, 2016, was received and noticed on January
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 6 of 16
5, 2016. The proposed project will result in permanent impacts to Wetland Basin 1, which is one
of three identified wetland basins identified on the property, shown in Figure 5 below. Wetland
Basin 1 has been identified as a Type 3, wet meadow wetland. It runs parallel to the southern
edge of the property and extends north along the western side of the property, containing an
intermittent tributary stream that flows to Lake Riley.
Ecisting Contour& Eleoation
Phi Topo lkWr(white)
Phnimum 10 Ft. Wetland Setback
From Proposed Driveway
8j0
Approximate OHW!
Top of Bank
Proposed Driveway
binirnun 30 Ft
(12 ft vide)
(Variance Request 70'
(green)
encroachment into 100' setback)
Delineated Wetland BlAfldary
(red)
®
W-32557 SF
121n. Culvert
•
Property Boundary
� ' W-1 16256 SF
s• '
• r
Proposed Wetland Impact
957 SF
(Yellow hatch) -
Proposed Contour (black) &Elevation
(yelkmdbladk)
Chanhaaaen, Carver County, MMMsWa
Jacobson mental PI I
PMrq: jj612}ep2felH
EMLjYLufP'IMrprt•n.ar.,
0 5 10 20
v
Fi ure7
c
Propow DnWWsY Impaet
mw
rmwm�ar'nKser� rzs.
Feet
Figure 5. Proposed driveway alignment and resulting wetland impacts.
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 7 of 16
The proposed alignment and driveway construction shown above will result in .022 acres (957
square feet) of impact to Wetland Basin 1. The proposed .022 acres of wetland impacts resulting
from the project are to be mitigated for using wetland bank credits purchased by the applicant
from account #1392. This wetland bank is located in the same Bank Service Area (BSA 9) and
Major Watershed 33 as the proposed project. Therefore, the impacts are required to be mitigated
for at a 2:1 ratio, resulting in the purchase of .044 acres of wetland credit from bank #1392. This
is consistent with Chapter 8420.0522 of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Rules.
ALTERNATIVES
The Wetland Conservation Act requires the applicant to list at least two alternatives to the
proposed project that would avoid or minimize impacts to wetlands or waters (one of which may
be "no build" or "do nothing"). The applicant then must list and explain why the option
described in the application was chosen over these alternatives. The following alternatives were
presented in the MN Interagency Water Resource Application submitted by the applicant:
No Build Alternative
The no build alternative is not considered to be a viable option because benefits such as
lot access are necessary in order to build a residence on the lot.
No Impact Alternative
A no impact alternative does not exist in this case.
Alternate 1
A minimum width driveway of 15 feet wide was used in this case. Steep slopes of 3:1
coming down from the driveway top were also employed to minimize fill impacts to the
extent possible. Fill impacts were 1248 square feet.
Alternate 2
A minimum width driveway of 12 feet wide was used in this case. Steep slopes of 3:1
coming down from the driveway top were also employed to minimize fill impacts to the
extent possible. Fill impacts were 957 square feet.
The applicant has decided to propose Alternate scenario 2, instilling a driveway width of 12 feet
in this case in order to minimize impacts, as well as avoid impacts to Wetland Basin 3.
Impact Minimization and Avoidance
The Wetland Conservation Act requires that if avoidance is not an option, the unavoidable
impacts are minimized to the greatest extent practicable. Efforts have been made by the
applicant to minimize the proposed wetland impacts by reducing the width of the driveway,
choosing an alignment that avoids impacts to additional wetland basins as well as increasing
slope grades, to minimize impacts resulting from slopes.
City code requires that a driveway be a minimum width of 10 feet. The proposed alternative
shows a width of 12 feet. Therefore, impacts could reasonably be reduced. Additionally, the
proposed alternative shows the driveway intersecting the public road at an oblique angle thereby
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 8of16
requiring that the wetland be transected at the same angle. This alignment creates a longer
crossing of the wetland and results in additional impacts that could be avoided. This alignment
also deviates from the requirements of Section 20-1122 of city code which states that "Within
right-of-way driveways should access city streets at 90 degrees."
These minimizations should be reviewed and discussed within the Interagency Water Resource
Application.
SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST
In order to achieve the proposed alignment and prevent impacts to Wetland Basin 3, the
applicant is requesting a variance to the 100 -foot shoreland setback requirement from the
tributary stream that flows through the property to Riley Lake.
Pursuant to Chanhassen City Code, Section 20-481 (a), structures shall be setback from the
ordinary high water level of tributary streams a minimum of 100 feet. As part of the proposed
driveway alignment, the applicant is requesting an encroachment of 70 feet into the required
100 -foot setback to allow for the proposed alignment and avoid further wetland impacts (See
Figure 6 below).
Figure 6. Variance Request
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 9 of 16
Variances Granted within 500 Feet of the Property
The Riley Lake Meadows development does not have a very extensive history of receiving
variances. Staff reviewed city records to determine if any variances were granted within 500 feet
of the subject property and found one approved variance at 240 Eastwood Court. This property
was granted an 18.5 -foot variance from the 30 -foot bluff protection setback to construct a deck.
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT
With only the driveway construction proposed for the property, there should likely be little to no
increase in surface water runoff rates or volumes. It must be noted, however, that the prevention
of pollution of surface waters is only one of the reasons for the enactment of shoreland
management rules. Minnesota Rules Chapter 6120.3300, Subpart 1. defines the purpose as:
"to manage the effects of shoreland and water surface crowding, to prevent pollution of
surface and ground waters of the state, to provide ample space on lots for sewage
treatment systems, to minimize flood damages, to maintain property values, to maintain
historic values of significant historic sites, and to maintain natural characteristics of
shorelands and adjacent water areas, shoreland controls must regulate lot sizes, placement
of structures, and alterations of shoreland areas."
In this case, however, the applicant has clearly demonstrated a sensitivity in their placement and
design of the driveway to the unique nature of the property and has made an effort to reduce the
impact on surface water resources.
OTHER AGENCIES
The applicant is responsible for obtaining any permits or approvals from the appropriate
regulatory agencies and compliance with their conditions of approval.
FINDINGS
Variance Findings — Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.
Finding: The construction of a 10 -foot wide driveway to access the property is a normal
use of a property in a residential district, which is in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of Chapter 20, Article XI. "RR" Rural Residential District. Providing adequate
driveway access is a standard accessory use for the property.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 10 of 16
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
Finding: The location of the tributary stream, as well as the location of the three
identified wetland basins on the lot, creates practical difficulties in providing access to
the lot. In order to avoid wetland impacts to an additional wetland basin on site, and
provide reasonable access to the lot and future residence, a shoreland setback variance
from the tributary is necessary.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The purpose of the variance is not based on economic considerations alone.
The applicant would like to construct a single-family home on a lot of record in a
residential zoning district and is trying to provide adequate access.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The location of both the tributary stream and wetland basins creates a unique
circumstance in constructing an adequate driveway to the lot. None of the water
resources were created by, nor was their location altered by, the landowner.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality (similar home
sizes).
Finding: The homes located on either side of the home are single-family residential
homes, and both have a bituminous driveway access, as do all homes in the
neighborhood. Granting the proposed variance request will not alter the essential
character of the locality or Riley Lake Meadows neighborhood, a rural residential district.
f Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
Wetland Alteration Permit Findings — Section 20-409 of the City Code provides that the Planning
Commission shall recommend a Wetland Alteration Permit and the Council shall issue such
Wetland Alteration Permit only if it finds that:
a. The proposed project will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts that will occur with the 9641 Meadowlark Lane
driveway construction have not been found to pose danger to public health, safety,
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 11 of 16
comfort, convenience or general welfare. The goal of the proposed project is to minimize
impacts to the wetlands on-site and to provide access to the future residence.
b. The proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive
Plan and the Zoning chapter of the City Code.
Finding: The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive
Plan and City Code. The proposed driveway construction is consistent with City zoning
for the neighborhood.
c. The proposed project will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be
compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and will not change the essential character of that area.
Finding: The appearance and character of the general vicinity will not change. The
applicant has made a reasonable effort to minimize impacts to wetlands by locating the
proposed driveway further to the west, and requesting a variance to avoid impacts to
Wetland 3. Currently, the proposed project is located within a Rural Residential (RR)
neighborhood, and the proposed project is consistent with the character and existing use
of the area.
d. The proposed project will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned
neighboring uses.
Finding: The surrounding uses, as well as the lot itself, are zoned for Rural Residential.
The wetland impacts proposed as a result of the project are not foreseen to cause hazards
or disturbance to existing or planned neighboring uses. The proposed project is
considered consistent with neighboring uses, as well as providing access to a residential
lot.
e. The proposed project will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services,
including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water
and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the
proposed use.
Finding: Any changes to drainage structures or additional drainage structures needed as
a result of the proposed wetland impacts will be designed and constructed by the
applicant's contracted consultant in compliance with City design standards. No further
public maintenance is required as a result of the proposed project. The proposed
driveway will be designed and constructed according to city standards.
f. The proposed project will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 12 of 16
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts associated with driveway construction will not
create excessive need for public facilities and services.
g. The proposed project will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment
and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the
general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare,
odors, rodents, or trash.
Finding: The proposed wetland alterations are not expected to be detrimental to any
persons, property or the general welfare.
h. The proposed project will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create
traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts will not create nor interfere with traffic and
surrounding public thoroughfares. When completed, the proposed driveway construction
will result in improved access for the landowner, and terminate the need to use the
neighboring property for access.
i. The proposed project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access,
natural, scenic or historic features of major significance.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts associated with the project will have no impact
on solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance.
The proposed project will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
Finding: The applicant has made a reasonable effort to minimize wetland impacts and
retain aesthetical compatibility within the area. In addition, the proposed driveway
project will complement the area.
k. The proposed project will not depreciate surrounding property values.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts have been minimized while still allowing for
the driveway construction project to occur. Though impacts have not been minimized to
the greatest extent feasible, if the conditions of approval are adopted, this requirement
will be fulfilled. The proposed driveway construction will create a safer access and will
be an asset to the surrounding properties.
1. The proposed project will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in the
City Code.
20-410 (b) When a permit is issued allowing wetland alteration, the following
standards shall be followed:
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 13 of 16
(1) The alteration will not have a net adverse effect on the ecological
and hydrological characteristics of remaining wetland.
Finding: The applicant must meet the included conditions for the
proposed wetland impacts in order to avoid an adverse effect on
the ecological and hydrological characteristics of remaining
wetland.
(2) It shall be located as to minimize the impact on vegetation.
Finding: Efforts have been made by the applicant to minimize the
impact on wetlands and vegetation through a variety of measures,
which included locating the driveway in a way to avoid further
impacts, as well as reducing the width of the driveway.
(3) It shall not adversely change water flow.
Finding: The applicant must meet the included conditions for the
proposed wetland impacts in order to avoid an adverse effect on
the hydraulic and hydrological characteristics of remaining
wetland. The preferred alignment indicates that a 12 -inch culvert
will be placed under the driveway but that the culvert will be
placed perpendicular to the driveway rather than along the flow
path of the wetland. Hydraulically this is not desirable. The
culvert shall be placed such that it is aligned with the flow path of
the wetland. The plan must be consistent with section 19-154 of
Chanhassen City code.
(4) The size of the altered area shall be limited to the minimum
required for the proposed action.
Finding: The applicant has made a reasonable effort to limit the
proposed wetland impacts, however there are further steps that
could be taken to reduce impacts to the minimum amount required
in order to complete the project. These steps are included as a
condition of approval. During construction the contractor is
required to follow approved plans to limit alterations to the
minimum the project necessitates.
(5) The disposal of any excess material is prohibited within remaining
wetland areas.
Finding: The applicant and their contractor are prohibited from
disposing of excess material within remaining wetland areas as
well as any other activities which may negatively impact the
remaining wetland areas.
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP — Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 14 of 16
(6) The disposal of any excess material shall include proper erosion
control and nutrient retention measures.
Finding: The applicant and their contractor must submit a
satisfactory erosion and sediment control plan, and comply with all
applicable sections of Chanhassen City Code, the City's Surface
Water Management Plan, and the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency.
(7) Alterations to any wetland area are prohibited during waterfowl
breeding season or fish spawning season, unless it is determined by
the city that the wetland is not used for waterfowl breeding or fish
spawning.
Finding: The applicant and their contractor are required to refrain
from any wetland altering activity during waterfowl breeding and
fish spawning season.
(8) Alterations to wetland areas shall be mitigated in accordance with
the requirements of this article if the activity results in a loss of
wetland area and/or function and value of the wetland.
Finding: The applicant has submitted a replacement plan as part
of the Interagency Water Resource Application for Wetland
Replacement which was received on January 5, 2016. The
applicant is proposing to replace the impacted area using wetland
bank credits. The required replacement ratio is 2:1. This is
consistent with Chapter 8420.0522. of the Wetland Conservation
Act (WCA) Rules, and City Code, Chapter 20, Article VI.
(9) Dedicated buffers in accordance with Sections 20-411.
Finding: The applicant must comply with the City's Wetland
Protection Ordinance.
In order to accommodate the proposed project, the plan proposes impacts to one wetland, totaling
.022 acres of permanent wetland impact. The applicant, David Vogel, is proposing to replace the
permanently impacted area resulting from the proposed driveway construction, using credits
from wetland bank #1392. This requires a 2:1 replacement ratio, which is consistent with
Chapter 8420.0522. of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) Rules.
The applicant must receive the City's approval of a wetland replacement plan prior to any
wetland impact occurring.
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP – Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 15 of 16
SUMMARY
The applicant is requesting a Wetland Alteration Permit and approval of a wetland replacement
plan under the MN Wetland Conservation Act for the construction of a proposed driveway to
access the property at 9641 Meadowlark Lane. Although impacts could be further reduced, the
applicant has made significant efforts in reducing and avoiding impacts to wetlands on the
property.
The applicant is also requesting a variance to encroach 70 feet into the minimum setback
requirement of 100 feet from the tributary stream that runs through the property. The proposed
project is not allowed per City Code and requires a variance from the City; however, the
applicant’s request to construct a driveway in order to access the property is a reasonable use of
the property. Furthermore, the applicant is requesting the proposed variance in order to avoid
additional wetland impacts.
It is unlikely that there will be any additional drainage runoff or pollution due to the approval of
the proposed driveway; however, there are multiple other reasons for the enactment of the
shoreland management rules. In this case, however, the applicant has chosen the proposed
driveway alignment in an effort to preserve and avoid impacts to the natural resources on the
property.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that City Council approve
Wetland Alteration Permit #2016-04 and authorize the Water Resources Coordinator to sign
the Interagency Water Resource Application, and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and
Recommendation; and that the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments, approve a variance to encroach 70 feet into the required 100-foot shoreland
setback from a tributary stream, as shown in plans dated January 6, 2016 to construct a
driveway, and adopt the attached Findings of Fact and Decision, subject to the following
conditions:
Wetland Alteration Permit
, or arguments and
1.Impacts must be minimized to the maximum practicable extent
discussions on alternatives and further minimization must be presented in the
Interagency Water Resource Application in order to fulfill the sequencing requirement,
and presenting alternate alignments
including narrowing the driveway to 10 feet at the
wetland crossing.
2.No driveway beyond what is required to access the site and get beyond the wetland shall be
approved until a site and/or building plan is provided and approved.
3.The driveway shall be aligned to cross the wetland perpendicular to the long axis of the
wetland, i.e. in the shortest available route.
Planning Commission
9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and WAP – Planning Case 2016-04
February 2, 2016
Page 16 of 16
4.A letter from the Board of Soil and Water Resources stating that the credits have been
debited and applied towards this impact must be provided prior to any disturbance of the
wetland.
5.An erosion prevention and sediment control plan consistent with Section 19-154 of city code
must be included.
6.The plan must indicate how temporary impacts to the wetland and the buffer area will be
permanently stabilized.
7.Culvert shall be aligned with the flow line of the wetland being crossed. Elevations at both
culvert openings shall be indicated on the plan.
8.The applicant must obtain approvals from the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed
District.
Shoreland Setback Variance
1.The driveway shall not be approved beyond what is necessary to access the site and get
beyond the wetland. No other portion shall be allowed within the setback unless approved
with a site and/or building plan application.
2.Any future structures including, but not limited to, Subsurface Sewage Treatment System
(SSTS) shall meet all ordinance and setback requirements.
ATTACHMENTS
1.Findings of Fact and Recommendation for Wetland Alteration Permit.
2.Findings of Fact and Decision for Variance.
3.Development Review Application.
4.Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application.
5.Affidavit of Mailing of Public Hearing Notice.
g:\\plan\\2016 planning cases\\2016-04 9641 meadowlark lane variance & wap\\staff report.doc
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND RECOMMENDATION
WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT
IN RE:
Application of Gayle M. & Richard P. Vogel for a Wetland Alteration Permit for wetland
replacement for proposed impacts to one wetland, totaling .022 acres, as a part of the proposed
driveway construction project at 9641 Meadowlark Lane — Planning Case 2016-04.
On February 2, 2016, the Chanhassen Planning Commission met at its regularly scheduled
meeting to consider the application of Gayle M. & Richard P. Vogel for a wetland alteration
permit to impact one wetland, identified as Wetland Basin 1. The total area proposed to be
impacted is .022 acres. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the wetland
alteration permit which was preceded by published notice. The Planning Commission heard
testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Large Lot.
3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 7, Block 1, Riley Lake Meadows.
Wetland Alteration Permit Findings — Section 20-409 of the City Code provides that the Planning
Commission shall recommend a Wetland Alteration Permit and the Council shall issue such
Wetland Alteration Permit only if it finds that:
a. The proposed project will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts that will occur with the 9641 Meadowlark Lane
driveway construction have not been found to pose danger to public health, safety,
comfort, convenience or general welfare. The goal of the proposed project is to minimize
impacts to the wetlands on-site and to provide access to the future residence.
b. The proposed project will be consistent with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive
Plan and the Zoning chapter of the City Code.
Finding: The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive
Plan and City Code. The proposed driveway construction is consistent with City zoning
for the neighborhood.
c. The proposed project will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be
compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity
and will not change the essential character of that area.
Finding: The appearance and character of the general vicinity will not change. The
applicant has made a reasonable effort to minimize impacts to wetlands by locating the
proposed driveway further to the west, and requesting a variance to avoid impacts to
Wetland 3. Currently, the proposed project is located within a Rural Residential (RR)
neighborhood, and the proposed project is consistent with the character and existing use
of the area.
d. The proposed project will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned
neighboring uses.
Finding: The surrounding uses, as well as the lot itself, are zoned for Rural Residential.
The wetland impacts proposed as a result of the project are not foreseen to cause hazards
or disturbance to existing or planned neighboring uses. The proposed project is
considered consistent with neighboring uses, as well as providing access to a residential
lot.
e. The proposed project will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services,
including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water
and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the
proposed use.
Finding: Any changes to drainage structures or additional drainage structures needed as
a result of the proposed wetland impacts will be designed and constructed by the
applicant's contracted consultant in compliance with City design standards. No further
public maintenance is required as a result of the proposed project. The proposed
driveway will be designed and constructed according to city standards.
f. The proposed project will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and
services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts associated with driveway construction will not
create excessive need for public facilities and services.
g. The proposed project will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment
and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the
general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare,
odors, rodents, or trash.
Finding: The proposed wetland alterations are not expected to be detrimental to any
persons, property or the general welfare.
h. The proposed project will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create
traffic congestion or interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts will not create nor interfere with traffic and
surrounding public thoroughfares. When completed, the proposed driveway construction
will result in improved access for the landowner, and terminate the need to use the
neighboring property for access.
i. The proposed project will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access,
natural, scenic or historic features of major significance.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts associated with the project will have no impact
on solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance.
j. The proposed project will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
Finding: The applicant has made a reasonable effort to minimize wetland impacts and
retain aesthetical compatibility within the area. In addition, the proposed driveway
project will complement the area.
k. The proposed project will not depreciate surrounding property values.
Finding: The proposed wetland impacts have been minimized while still allowing for
the driveway construction project to occur. Though impacts have not been minimized to
the greatest extent feasible, if the conditions of approval are adopted, this requirement
will be fulfilled. The proposed driveway construction will create a safer access and will
be an asset to the surrounding properties.
1. The proposed project will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in the
City Code.
20-410 (b) When a permit is issued allowing wetland alteration, the following
standards shall be followed:
(1) The alteration will not have a net adverse effect on the ecological
and hydrological characteristics of remaining wetland.
Finding: The applicant must meet the included conditions for the
proposed wetland impacts in order to avoid an adverse effect on
the ecological and hydrological characteristics of remaining
wetland.
(2) It shall be located as to minimize the impact on vegetation.
Finding: Efforts have been made by the applicant to minimize the
impact on wetlands and vegetation through a variety of measures,
which included locating the driveway in a way to avoid further
impacts, as well as reducing the width of the driveway.
(3) It shall not adversely change water flow.
Finding: The applicant must meet the included conditions for the
proposed wetland impacts in order to avoid an adverse effect on
the hydraulic and hydrological characteristics of remaining
wetland. The preferred alignment indicates that a 12 inch culvert
will be placed under the driveway but that the culvert will be
placed perpendicular to the driveway rather than along the flow
path of the wetland. Hydraulically this is not desirable. The
culvert shall be placed such that it is aligned with the flow path of
the wetland. The plan must be consistent with section 19-154 of
Chanhassen City code.
(4) The size of the altered area shall be limited to the minimum
required for the proposed action.
Finding: The applicant has made a reasonable effort to limit the
proposed wetland impacts, however there are further steps that
could be taken to reduce impacts to the minimum amount required
in order to complete the project. These steps are included as a
condition of approval. During construction the contractor is
required to follow approved plans to limit alterations to the
minimum the project necessitates.
(5) The disposal of any excess material is prohibited within remaining
wetland areas.
Finding: The applicant and their contractor are prohibited from
disposing of excess material within remaining wetland areas as
well as any other activities which may negatively impact the
remaining wetland areas.
(6) The disposal of any excess material shall include proper erosion
control and nutrient retention measures.
Finding: The applicant and their contractor must submit a
satisfactory erosion and sediment control plan, and comply with all
applicable sections of Chanhassen City Code, the City's Surface
Water Management Plan, and the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency.
(7) Alterations to any wetland area are prohibited during waterfowl
breeding season or fish spawning season, unless it is determined by
the city that the wetland is not used for waterfowl breeding or fish
spawning.
Finding: The applicant and their contractor are required to refrain
from any wetland altering activity during waterfowl breeding and
fish spawning season.
11
(8) Alterations to wetland areas shall be mitigated in accordance with
the requirements of this article if the activity results in a loss of
wetland area and/or function and value of the wetland.
Finding: The applicant has submitted a replacement plan as part
of the Interagency Water Resource Application for Wetland
Replacement which was received on January 5, 2016. The
applicant is proposing to replace the impacted area using wetland
bank credits. The required replacement ratio is 2:1. This is
consistent with Chapter 8420.0522. of the Wetland Conservation
Act (WCA) Rules, and City Code, Chapter 20, Article VI.
(9) Dedicated buffers in accordance with Sections 20-411.
Finding: The applicant must comply with the City's Wetland
Protection Ordinance.
5. The planning report #2016-04, dated February 2, 2016, prepared by Krista Spreiter, et al, is
incorporated herein.
RECOMMENDATION
The Chanhassen Planning Commission recommends that City Council approve
Wetland Alteration Permit #2016-04 and authorize the Water Resources Coordinator to sign
the Interagency Water Resource Application, subject to conditions within the staff report.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this 2nd day of February, 2016.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Chairman
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
VARIANCE
IN RE:
Application of Gayle M. & Richard P. Vogel for a 70 -foot shoreland setback variance from a
tributary to construct a driveway on property zoned Agricultural Estate (A2) — Planning Case 2016-
04.
On February 2, 2016, the Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and
Adjustments, met at its regularly scheduled meeting to consider the application. The Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed variance preceded by published and
mailed notice. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential District (RR).
2. The property is guided in the Chanhassen Comprehensive Plan for Residential Large Lot.
3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 7, Block 1, Riley Lake Meadows.
4. Variance Findines — Section 20-58 of the City Code provides the following criteria for the
granting of a variance:
a. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of this Chapter and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive
plan.
Finding: The construction of a 10 -foot wide driveway to access the property is a normal
use of a property in a residential district, which is in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of Chapter 20, Article XI. "RR" Rural Residential District. Providing adequate
driveway access is a standard accessory use for the property.
b. When there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 'Practical
difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the
property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Chapter. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
Finding: The location of the tributary stream, as well as the location of the three
identified wetland basins on the lot, creates practical difficulties in providing access to
the lot. In order to avoid wetland impacts to an additional wetland basin on site, and
provide reasonable access to the lot and future residence, a shoreland setback variance
from the tributary is necessary.
c. That the purpose of the variation is not based upon economic considerations alone.
Finding: The purpose of the variance is not based on economic considerations alone.
The applicant would like to construct a single-family home on a lot of record in a
residential zoning district and is trying to provide adequate access.
d. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner.
Finding: The location of both the tributary stream and wetland basins creates a unique
circumstance in constructing an adequate driveway to the lot. None of the water
resources were created by, nor was their location altered by, the landowner.
e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality (similar home
sizes).
Finding: The homes located on either side of the home are single-family residential
homes, and both have a bituminous driveway access, as do all homes in the
neighborhood. Granting the proposed variance request will not alter the essential
character of the locality or Riley Lake Meadows neighborhood, a rural residential district.
f. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with this Chapter.
Finding: This does not apply to this request.
5. The planning report #2016-04, dated February 2, 2016, prepared by Krista Spreiter, et al, is
incorporated herein.
DECISION
The Chanhassen Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments,
approves a variance to encroach 70 feet into the required 100 -foot shoreland setback from a
tributary stream, as shown in plans dated January 6, 2016 to construct a driveway, subject to the
conditions of the staff report.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen Planning Commission this tad day of February, 2016.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
BY:
Chairman
2
.Zot�__ —
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division — 7700 Market Boulevard CITY OF CINHASSEN
Mailing Address — P.O. Box 147, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: (952) 227-1300 / Fax: (952) 227-1110
APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Submittal Date: ' ja ' ' PC Date: /a, /I (o_r tcc Date: -Z/aa- A 30•Day Review Date:- :3/
(lister to the appropriate Application Checklist for required submittal information that must accompany this application)
❑
Comprehensive Plan Amendment .........................
$600
❑ Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers .....
$100
❑
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
per lot
❑ Single -Family Residence ................................$325
❑ All Others.........................................................
$425
❑
Interim Use Permit (IUP)
❑ In conjunction with Single -Family Residence..
$325
❑ All Others .........................................................
$425
❑
Rezoning (REZ)
❑ Planned Unit Development (PUD) ..................
$750
through the development contrail.
❑ Minor Amendment to existing PUD .................
$100
Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........
❑ All Others .........................................................
$500
❑
Sign Plan Review ...................................................
$150
❑
Site Plan Review (SPR)
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
❑ Administrative..................................................
$100
$150
❑ Commercial/Industrial Districts*......................$500
❑ All Others .......................................................
$275
Plus $10 per 1,000 square feet of building area:
Zoning Appeal ......................................................
(—thousand square feet)
❑
Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA).................
'Include number of gxtstina employees:
'Include number of now employees:
❑ Residential Districts .........................................
$500
Plus $5 per dwelling unit (_ units)
❑
Subdivision (SUB)
❑ Create 3 lots or less ........................................
$300
❑ Create over 3 lots .......................$600 + $15
per lot
(_ lots)
❑ Metes & Bounds (2 lots)..................................$300
❑ Consolidate Lots..............................................$150
❑ Lot Line Adjustment.........................................$150
❑ Final Plat ..........................................................$700
(Includes $450 escrow for attorney costs)*
'Additional escrow may be required for other applications
through the development contrail.
❑
Vacation of Easements/Right-of-way (VAC)........
$300
(Additional recording fees may apply)
[Variance (VAR) ....................................................
$200
❑/
Wetland Alteration Permit (WAP)
❑� Single -Family Residence ...............................
$150
❑ All Others .......................................................
$275
❑
Zoning Appeal ......................................................
$100
❑
Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA).................
$500
NOTE: When multiple applications are processed concurrently
the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
[Notification Sign (city to install and remove)...................................................................................................................... $200
Property Owners' List within 500' (City to generate after pre -application meeting) .................................................. $3 per address
(_IL addresses) 4IS,S
❑v Escrow for Recording Documents (check all that apply) ......................................... ....... $50 per document
❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Interim Use Permit ❑ Site Plan Agreement
❑ Vacation Z Variance 2 Wetland Alteration Permit
❑ Metes & Bounds Subdivision (3 docs.) ❑ Easements (_easements) ap
TOTAL FEE: $ "�
Section 2: Required Information
Description of Proposal: Proposing to impact approximately 1248 square feet of wetland area for construction of a
driveway in order to access private property directly from street.
Property Address or Location:
9641 Meadowlark Lane
Parcel #: 257420070 Legal Description: NE 1/4 of Section 25, T1 16N, R23W
Total Acreage: 2.40 Wetlands Present? ® Yes ❑ No
Present Zoning: Rural Residential District (RR) Requested Zoning: Rural Residential District (RR)
Present Land Use Designation: Residential Large Lot Requested Land Use Designation: Residential Large Lot
Existing Use of Property: Currently no structure on property.
❑ Check box is separate narrative is attached.
Section 3: Property Owner and Applicant Information
APPLICANTI CIHER THAN PRC PERTY OWNER: In :iidning tl is applicatian, I, as applicant, nepresent io have attainec
aulhoriaailian fram the property cmner 10 file 11h is appllieatian. I agrcei io to boL rid ty canditianc of approval, sL tjEicl only to
1t a right to abject at the heanings an It a applicalion or( L ning the appeal Ilenioc. 11111is applicalion h as nol teeri Eiignec by
It a proper y awnen, I Lave attached separate documental ion of full legal oarjachy to Ille IVEi applicattori. This applicalion
st aLlc to proce:iscc in my name anc I am the party "hom It e C ill shot Ic conlact regarc ing any matter pertaining loth is
applicatian. I will keElpl myself informed of the deac lines far SL t misvian of material aric the pragrcav oil it is application. I
fL rtt Ein unc enedarid 1t al adc ilional feeEi may to at eingec fan carisu Icing feet, feasibility Elu c les, eda. with an wilimaile p1doo to
any VLtl anizatian 10 prociecc Hilt the slue y. I car illy 1ha9 thEi infarmalion anc exhib its EILbmittec are in a and cannot.
Name: C ontacl:
Ac c ness: Pt arae:
City,ISla1e,IZipl: Cell:
Email: Fain:
SigriatL ne: Cate:
PRORERTY OWNER: In E idning tt is application, I, ail prapEirtl awnem, t ave full legal capacity lo, anc heuebl c a,
aulhori2e the filing of IIhi,i applicalion. I uncen;danc Thal eoncitions of arlFlnova] anEi biricing and agree to 11Ei bounc by It ase
coric itians, subject only la the nigt I to ot,jecl a1 th e h eadrigs or c L ming th a appeal pemioc s. I m ill keiep myself infomiec cd
tt Ei c sac linEis fon submission of material rind Il Ei pnogreisa ct tf is aprllicatian. I IL r her L ricerstand that ac c iticrial lees may
to ct eingEic lor cpnEiL 1lincl feed, feaait ilily stL c iris, Esta. with an e:dimaile pinion to and aLtt arizatian to praoeEic wilt the
sludl. I cEirtity that the information aric exhib its U t milled are lot Ei and corne(t.
Name: Dlavic Vogel Conlact: David Vagel
Ac c rese: 109 Pioneer Tnail Phone: 161-41) 991-28z EI
Ci'yJSlaleJZipl: Clanhas:ien, MN 99317 Cell: 161-41; 991-284EI
Email: (� 13 dpvagel@gmail.cclm Fax:
Date: k i 4 i \1,
TV is application must be campleled in fL II anc mL st b E1 aacamplantec ty all infaematian anc plans negLtnec ty
E prliicrit Ie City C oc finance pnovisions. Belfane illncl IhiEi arlplliealiori, neter to It EI apprapldate A pipliceitiori Cheiaklist
and writer H ill the Plarinind Department to c eicomine It a speaifia anc inanca and applicable pnocedural
riquiremernls anc fewi.
A cetamminalion of aampleteness of the aplpltaalion sl all be mace vt itf in 19 b L sincse (ayEi cd applicatian submittal. A
,Aoitteri ncdiae ell appli(atieri cafiaieneies shall be mailec ilo Rel applicaritwilhin'15 business days of applicatian.
PROJECT ENGINEER ild appllicab le)
Na rric:
A cdreissr
Ci1y)1StaledZtp:
Email:
C onlacd:
Pharie:
C ell:
Fax:
Who should receive copies of staff reports? *Other Cartacl Informations
r❑
Poorl iry Cwrien Via:
❑] Email
❑ NailEIC Papal Copy
Names
El
Applicanl Via:
❑� Email
❑ Nailed Papler Capy
Acdrasr. _
ElEndirieer
Via:
❑ Email
❑ Mailed Papler Capy
CilydSlaledZip:
❑
ClhEm* Via:
❑ Email
❑ Mailed Paper Capl
Email:
INSTRUC7110NS TO APPIJIC AINT: Camplete all necels:ary loom field. -i, then selelct SAVE FC RM 4o save a copiy tel your
c evicie. PRINT FORM aric c eliver to city along wilh recIL inec c eau merilsi and playment. SUBMIT RORM tel dent a digital
copl to the oity foil pracElsving 1rccluirec ). SAVE NORM PRINII RCIRN SUBMfI FORM
We meed 111is uarianaa 1 o build a driveway fon the Not se that we plan 1 o build in 1 he
sprinig of 2016. Tlk acdine di1cH Has bean designated as wetland, and we need to go within
50 fiat of the stream 1a aaoid constructing part of the driwwaM alien additional wet.lard
on 1ho north) side oflthe ditch. This Hariiation will not only avoid laking out additional
wetland, but also minimize the number of largo tress ricoded In be remKcd that are also
laaated in that arca and be3pnd. The nasl of 1ho new drimewa31 will mos1131 follow 1ha d:iri
road that our family) Has u seri for oueui a 10(1 Hears Io get to the lake VIE minimal remomal
of arty additional trees.
Project Name and/or Number: 2015-275
PART ONE: Applicant Information
If applicant is an entity (company, government entity, partnership, etc.), an authorized contact person must be identified. If the
applicant is using an agent (consultant, lawyer, or other third party) and has authorized them to act on their behalf, the agent's
contact information must also be provided.
Applicant/Landowner Name: David Vogel
Mailing Address: 105 Pioneer Trail
Phone: 612-991-2848
E-mail Address: dpvogel@gmail.com
Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above): SAA
Mailing Address:
Phone:
E-mail Address:
Agent Name: Wayne Jacobson, PSS, WDC Jacobson Environmental
Mailing Address: 5821 Humboldt Avenue North
Phone: 612-802-6619
E -mall Address: jacobsonenv@msn.com
County: Carver
PART TWO: Site Location Information
City/Township: Chanhassen
Parcel ID and/or Address: 9641 Meadowlark Lane
Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): Sec. 25, T116N, R23W
Lat/Long (decimal degrees):
Attach a map showing the location of the site in relation to local streets, roads, highways.
Approximate size of site (acres) or if a linear project, length (feet): 2.4
If you know that your proposal will require an individual Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, you must provide the
names and addresses of all property owners adjacent to the project site. This information may be provided by attaching a list to
your application or by using block 25 of the Application for Department of the Army permit which can be obtained at:
http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Portals/57/docs/regulatory/RegulatoryDocs/engform 4345 2012oct pdf
PART THREE: General Project/Site Information
If this application is related to a delineation approval, exemption determination, jurisdictional determination, or other
correspondence submitted prior to this application then describe that here and provide the Corps of Engineers project number.
Describe the project that is being proposed, the project purpose and need, and schedule for implementation and completion. The
project description must fully describe the nature and scope of the proposed activity including a description of all project elements
that effect aquatic resources (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) and must also include plans and cross section or profile drawings
showing the location, character, and dimensions of all proposed activities and aquatic resource impacts.
See Appendix A Project Description, Appendix B Implementation Schedule, Appendix C Project Purpose and Need.
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 3 of 11
Project Name and/or Number: 2015-275
PART FOUR: Aquatic Resource Impact' Summary
If your proposed project involves a direct or indirect impact to an aquatic resource (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) identify each
impact in the table below. Include all anticipated impacts, including those expected to be temporary. Attach an overhead view
map, aerial photo, and/or drawing showing all of the aquatic resources in the project area and the location(s) of the proposed
impacts. Label each aquatic resource on the map with a reference number or letter and identify the impacts in the following table.
'If impacts are temporary; enter the duration of the impacts in days next to the "T". For example, a project with a temporary access fill that
would be removed after 220 days would be entered "T (220)".
'Impacts less than 0.01 acre should be reported in square feet. Impacts 0.01 acre or greater should be reported as acres and rounded to the .
nearest 0.01 acre. Tributary impacts must be reported in linear feet of impact and an area of impact by indicating first the linear Feet of impact
along the flowline of the stream followed by the area impact in parentheses). For example, a project that impacts 50 feet of a stream that is 6
feet wide would be reported as 50 ft (300 square feet).
3This is generally only applicable if you are applying for a de minimis exemption under MN Rules 8420.0420 Subp. 8, otherwise enter "N%A".
°Use Wetland Plants and Plant Community Types of Minnesota and Wisconsin 3rd Ed, as modified in MN Rules 8420.0405 Subp. 2.
'Refer to Major Watershed and Bank Service Area maps in MN Rules 8420.0522 Subp. 7.
If any of the above identified impacts have already occurred, identify which impacts they are and the circumstances associated
with each:
PART FIVE: Applicant Signature
❑ Check here if you are requesting a pre -application consultation with the Corps and LGU based on the information you have
provided. Regulatory entities will not initiate a formal application review if this box is checked.
By signature below, I attest that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further attest that I possess the
authority to undertake the work described herein.
Signature: X _ Date: 1/4/2016
I hereby authorize Wayne Jacobson to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon
request, supplemental information in support of this application.
�y �f
The term "impact' as used in this joint application form is a generic term used for disclosure purposes to identify
activities that may require approval from one or more regulatory agencies. For purposes of this form it is not meant to
indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement.
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 4 of 11
Aquatic
q
Type of Impact
Duration of
County, Major
Aquatic Resource
q
Resource Type
(fill, excavate,
Impact
Overall Size of
Existing Plant
Watershed #,
ID (as noted on
(wetland, lake,
drain, or
Permanent (P) Size of impactZ
Aquatic
c
Com munity
and Bank
overhead view)
tributary etc.)
remove
or Temporary
'
3
Resource
Type(s) in
�
Impact Area
service Area #
vegetation)
_ (T)
of Impact Area
W1
W
F
_P 0.022
N/A
SM
10,33,9
'If impacts are temporary; enter the duration of the impacts in days next to the "T". For example, a project with a temporary access fill that
would be removed after 220 days would be entered "T (220)".
'Impacts less than 0.01 acre should be reported in square feet. Impacts 0.01 acre or greater should be reported as acres and rounded to the .
nearest 0.01 acre. Tributary impacts must be reported in linear feet of impact and an area of impact by indicating first the linear Feet of impact
along the flowline of the stream followed by the area impact in parentheses). For example, a project that impacts 50 feet of a stream that is 6
feet wide would be reported as 50 ft (300 square feet).
3This is generally only applicable if you are applying for a de minimis exemption under MN Rules 8420.0420 Subp. 8, otherwise enter "N%A".
°Use Wetland Plants and Plant Community Types of Minnesota and Wisconsin 3rd Ed, as modified in MN Rules 8420.0405 Subp. 2.
'Refer to Major Watershed and Bank Service Area maps in MN Rules 8420.0522 Subp. 7.
If any of the above identified impacts have already occurred, identify which impacts they are and the circumstances associated
with each:
PART FIVE: Applicant Signature
❑ Check here if you are requesting a pre -application consultation with the Corps and LGU based on the information you have
provided. Regulatory entities will not initiate a formal application review if this box is checked.
By signature below, I attest that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further attest that I possess the
authority to undertake the work described herein.
Signature: X _ Date: 1/4/2016
I hereby authorize Wayne Jacobson to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon
request, supplemental information in support of this application.
�y �f
The term "impact' as used in this joint application form is a generic term used for disclosure purposes to identify
activities that may require approval from one or more regulatory agencies. For purposes of this form it is not meant to
indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement.
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 4 of 11
Project Name and/or Number: 2015-275
Attachment C
Avoidance and Minimization
Project Purpose, Need, and Requirements. Clearly state the purpose of your project and need for your project. Also include a
description of any specific requirements of the project as they relate to project location, project footprint, water management,
and any other applicable requirements. Attach an overhead plan sheet showing all relevant features of the project (buildings,
roads, etc.), aquatic resource features (impact areas noted) and construction details (grading plans, storm water management
plans, etc.), referencing these as necessary:
See Appendix C Project Purpose and Need
i Avoidance. Both the CWA and the WCA require that impacts to aquatic resources be avoided if practicable alternatives exist.
Clearly describe all on-site measures considered to avoid impacts to aquatic resources and discuss at least two project alternatives
that avoid all impacts to aquatic resources on the site. These alternatives may include alternative site plans, alternate sites, and/or
not doing the project. Alternatives should be feasible and prudent (see MN Rules 8420.0520 Subp. 2 C). Applicants a,e encouraged
to attach drawings and plans to support their analysis:
See Appendix D Avoidance and Minimization
Minimization. Both the CWA and the WCA require that all unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources be minimized to the greatest
extent practicable. Discuss all features of the proposed project that have been modified to minimize the impacts to water
resources (see MN Rules 5420.0520 Subp. 4):
See Appendix D Avoidance and Minimization
Off -Site Alternatives. An off-site alternatives analysis is not required for all permit applications. If you know that your proposal
will require an individual permit (standard permit or letter of permission) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, you may be
required to provide an off-site alternatives analysis. The alternatives analysis is not required for a complete applicat on but must
be provided during the review process in order for the Corps to complete the evaluation of your application and reach a final
decision. Applicants with questions about when an off-site alternatives analysis is required should contact their Corps Project
Manager.
N/A
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 7 of 11
r_ -- --- -
I
Project Name and/or Number: 2015-27S
Attachment D
Replacement/Compensatory Mitigation
Complete this part if your application involves wetland replacement/compensatory mitigation not associated with the local road
wetland replacement program. Applicants should consult Corps mitigation guidelines and WCA rules for requirements.
Replacement/Compensatory Mitigation via Wetland Banking. Complete this section if you are proposing to use credits from an
existing wetland bank (with an account number in the State wetland banking system) for all or part of your
replacement/compensatory mitigation requirements.
----[
Wetland Bank T Bank
Major
Credit Type
Bank
Major
Service
Watershed # Area #
Count
Account # y Watershed # Service
(if applicable)
Number of Credits
Area #
1392 10 33 9
SWC
.044
Applicants should attach documentation indicating that they have contacted the wetland bank account owner and reached at
i least a tentative agreement to utilize the identified credits for the project. This documentation could be a signed purchase
agreement, signed application for withdrawal of credits or some other correspondence indicating an agreement between the
applicant and the bank owner. However, applicants are advised not to enter into a binding agreement to purchase credits until the
j mitigation plan is approved by the Corps and LGU.
Project -Specific Replacement/Permittee Responsible Mitigation. Complete this section if you are proposing to pursue actions
(restoration, creation, preservation, etc.) to generate wetland replacement/compensatory mitigation credits for this proposed
project.
Corps Mitigation
WCA Action Eligible
for Credit' Compensation Acres
Technique
Credit % Credits
Requested Anticipated a County
Bank
Major
Service
Watershed # Area #
Refer to the name and subpart number in MN Rule 8420.0526.
2Refer to the technique listed in St. Paul District Policy for Wetland Compensatory Mitigation in Minnesota.
3 I WCA and Corps crediting differs, then enter both numbers and distinguish which is Corps and which is WCA.
Explain how each proposed action or technique will be completed (e.g. wetland hydrology will be restored by breaking the tile......)
and how the proposal meets the crediting criteria associated with it. Applicants should refer to the Corps mitigation policy
language, WCA rule language, and all associated Corps and WCA guidance related to the action or technique:
Attach a site location map, soils map, recent aerial photograph, and any other maps to show the location and other relevant
features of each wetland replacement/mitigation site. Discuss in detail existing vegetation, existing landscape features, land use
(on and surrounding the site), existing soils, drainage systems (if present), and water sources and movement. Include a
topographic map showing key features related to hydrology and water flow (inlets, outlets, ditches, pumps, etc.):
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 8 of 11
Project Name and/or Number:
Attach a map of the existing aquatic resources, associated delineation report, and any documentation of regulatory review or
approval. Discuss as necessary:
See Appendix E Wetland Delineation Approval
For actions involving construction activities, attach construction plans and specifications with all relevant details. Discuss and
provide documentation of a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the site to define existing conditions, predict project outcomes,
identify specific project performance standards and avoid adverse offsite impacts. Plans and specifications should be prepared by
a licensed engineer following standard engineering practices. Discuss anticipated construction sequence and timing:
See Figure'p Plan Sheet
For projects involving vegetation restoration, provide a vegetation establishment plan that includes information on site
preparation, seed mixes and plant materials, seeding/planting plan (attach seeding/planting zone map), planting/seeding
methods, vegetation maintenance, and an anticipated schedule of activities:
For projects involving construction or vegetation restoration, identify and discuss goals and specific outcomes that can be
determined for credit allocation. Provide a proposed credit allocation table tied to outcomes:
I Provide a five-year monitoring plan to address project outcomes and credit allocation:
Discuss and provide evidence of ownership or rights to conduct wetland replacement/mitigation on each site:
Lot is owned by David Vogel
Quantify all proposed wetland credits and compare to wetland impacts to identify a proposed wetland replacement ratio. Discuss
how this replacement ratio is consistent with Corps and WCA requirements:
2:1
By signature below, the applicant attests to the following (only required if application involves project-specific/permittee
responsible replacement):
• All proposed replacement wetlands were not:
• Previously restored or created under a prior approved replacement plan or permit
• Drained or filled under an exemption during the previous 10 years
• Restored with financial assistance from pu blit conservation programs
• Restored using private funds, other than landowner funds, unless the funds are paid back with interest to the individual
or organization that funded the restoration and the individual or organization notifies the local government unit in
writing that the restored wetland may be considered for replacement.
The wetland will be replaced before or concurrent with the actual draining or filling of a wetland.
An irrevocable bank letter of credit, performance bond, or other acceptable security will be provided to guarantee successful
completion of the wetland replacement.
Within 30 days of either receiving approval of this application or beginning work on the project, I will record the Declaration of
Restrictions and Covenants on the deed for the property on which the replacement wetland(s) will be located and submit proof
of such recording to the LGU and the Corps.
Applicant or Representative: David Vogel Title: Landowner
Signature: A Date: 1/4/2016
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 9 of 11
Delineated Wetland Boundary
(red)
Property boundary
Proposed
(15 ft wide)
(green)
Proposed Cori &
11MI" -171W (black)
Q G®
Proposed Wetland Impact
1248 SF
(yellow hatch)
I
Existing Contour & Elevation
I Mn_Topo Lidar (white)
Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota
Phone'(612)-602-6619
E-mail: jacobeonenv@1msn.com
0 5 10 20 -'-• _—
v Figure 6 P 1 Me ame_
8841 mxeowivx 1 11.1 nxo„ea..e,. .
UL
Existing Contour & Elevation 'I
Mn_Topo Lidar (white) I
Minimum 5 Ft. Wetland Setback
From Proposed Driveway
Proposed Did
(121twide)
(green)
Delineated Wetland Boundary
(red)
Property Boundary
W4'162WRr� , ®
al+<t IF
Proposed Wetland Impact
957 SF
(yellow hatch)
Proposed Contour (black) &
r (yellow/black)
Chanhassen, Carver County, Minnesota Jacobson Fnv'ronn
Phone: (612)-802-6619
.#�y.. E-mail: jacmbsonenv@msn.com
0 5 10 20 "d"
O Fi ure 7
APPENDIX A
Project Description
Project Description
This project proposed by David Vogel is for a construction of a driveway in order to access his lot from
Meadowlark Lane. The driveway will be a minimum width of 12' of bituminous on the top with a 3:1 fill
slope on the sides. A 12" culvert will be placed in the center of the crossing in order to facilitate water
flow in the wetland. The location of the crossing is at a point which will be 5' away from a wetland on
the east and at least 35' away from an intermittent ditch which occasionally carries water to Riley Lake.
The Figure 7 plan which reflects required avoidance and minimization reflects 0.022 acres of permanent
fill impacts to low quality (as measured by MNRAM) reed canary grass dominated wetlands, and
replacement by high quality 0.044 acre wetland bank credits. A wetland bank purchase of 0.044 SWC
acres from bank service area 9 within watershed 33 would be completed from the Minnesota Wetland
Bank to fulfill the mitigation requirements.
APPENDIX B
Implementation Schedule
Project Implementation Schedule
Item Proposed Completion
1. Initial Project Grading
April 20115
2. Initial Spring Construction
April 2016
3. Construction Inspection
May 2016
APPENDIX C
Project Purpose and Need
Purpose and Need
The purpose of the project is to provide driveway access to the lot for home construction from
Meadowlark Lane. Currently the lot has no access available to it because the entire south portion of the
lot has a wetland separating Meadowlark Lane and the lot. The wetland crossing is necessary in order to
provide access.
APPENDIX D
Avoidance and Minimization
Avoidance and Minimization
No build alternative
The no build alternative is not considered to be a viable option because benefits such as lot access are
necessary in order to build a residence on the lot.
No Impact alternative
A no impact alternative does not exist in this case.
Alternate 1— Figure 6
A minimum width driveway of 15' wide was used in this case. Steep slopes of 3:1 coming down from the
driveway top were also employed to minimize fill impacts to the extent possible. Fill impacts were 1248
sf.
Alternate 2 — Figure 7
A minimum width driveway of 12' wide was used in this case. Steep slopes of 3:1 coming down from the
driveway top were also employed to minimize fill impacts to the extent possible. Fill impacts were 957
sf.
APPENDIX E
Wetland Delineation Approval
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
Notice of Decision
Local Government Unit (LGM Address
City of Chanhassen 7700 Market Boulevard, PO Boz 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
Applicant Name Project Name TA
ofApplication
David Vogel 9641 Meadowlark Lane cation Number
/2015 2015-08
Attach site locator map. "—'�—
[ype of Decision:
® Wetland Boundary or Type -- ❑ No -Loss ❑ Exemption pt ❑ Sequencing;
❑ Replacement Plan ❑ Banking Plan
Technical Evaluation Panel Findin s and Recommendation if any):
❑ Approve ❑ Approve with conditions ❑ Deny Sinnmary ( or attach):
Date of Decision: November 20, 2015
❑ Approved ® Approved with conditions (include below) ❑ Denied
BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page I
of 3
LGU Findings and Conclusions (attach additional sheets as necessary):
Jacobson Environmental PLLC, on behalf of David Vogel, has performed a wetland determination
and boundary delineation, for the parcel located at 9641 Meadowlark Lane, in Chanhassen. This
parcel is located in the NE'/< of Section 25, TI 16N, R23 W and has the following parcel ID:
257420070. This delineation identified three wetland basins on-site.
Wetland basin 1 is located at the southern edge of the property and extends north through the property
to Riley Lake, which includes an intermittent stream which flows into Lake Riley, and drains a 73
acre watershed. It has been identified as a Type 3, wet meadow, PEMCd wetland. Wetland basin 3 is
located in the southeast comer and has been identified as a Type 2/6, wet meadow/shrub swamp,
PEM/SS1B wetland. Wetland basin 4 is located on the southwestem border of the parcel, and extends
into the property to the west. It has been identified as a Type 4, deep marsh, PEMF wetland.
Wetland basin 4 has been identified on the National Wetland Inventory map. None of the identified
wetland basins on site are identified on the DNR Public Waters Map. However, Lake Riley lies at the
northern border of the property.
Based upon our review, the City of Chanhassen, as the LGU responsible for administration of
Minnesota R. 8420, concurs with the delineated boundary and types as identified in the wetland
determination and delineation report prepared by Jacobson Environmental PLLC, dated October 231a,
2015, and the wetland boundaries shown within the report. The Application for Wetland Boundary
and Type was noticed on October 28, 2015. No additional comments were received from the
Technical Evaluation Panel members or from the public. This concludes our review.
Upon the provision of the electronic representation of the delineated boundaries (*.shp or
*.dwpJ, this delineation will be considered approved.
For Replacement Plans using credits from the State Wetland Bank:
Bank Account #
Bank Service Area
County
Credits Approved for
Withdrawal (sq. ft. or nearest
_—
.01 acre
Replacement Plan Approval Conditions. In addition to any conditions specified by the LGU, the
approval of a Wetland Replacement Plan is conditional upon the following:
❑ Financial Assurance: For project -specific replacement that is not in -advance, a financial assurance
specified by the LGU must be submitted to the LGU in accordance with MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9
(List amount and type in LGU Findings).
❑ Deed Recording: For project -specific replacement, evidence must be provided to the LGU that the
BWSR "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" and "Consent to Replacement Wetland" :Forms
have been filed with the county recorder's office in which the replacement wetland is located.
❑ Credit Withdrawal: For replacement consisting of wetland bank credits, confirmation that BWSR
has withdrawn the credits from the state wetland bank as specified in the approved replacement plan.
Wetlands may not be impacted until all applicable conditions have been metl
BWSR Forms 11 -25-09
:?
of 3 Page
LGU Authorized Simtature:
Signing and mailing of this completed form to the appropriate recipients in accordance with 8420 X0255, �
Subp. 5 provides notice that a decision was made by the LGU under the Wetland Conservation Act as
specified above. If additional details on the decision exist, they have been provided to the landowner
and are available from the LGU upon re uest.
Name
Title
Terrance Jeffery, WDC
Water Resources Coordinator
Sign2tu
✓(�
Date
Phone Number and E-mail
/
952.227.1168
_....._
t' effery(aci.chanhassen.mn.us
Additional-trp�vals or permits from local, state, and federal agencies may be required. Check with ,d]
appropriate authorities before commencing work in or near wetlands.
Applicants proceed at their own risk if work authorized by this decision is started before the time period
for appeal (30 days) has expired. If this decision is reversed or revised under appeal, the applicant may be
responsible for restoring or replacing all wetland impacts.
This decision is valid for three years from the date of decision unless a longer period is advised by the TEP
and specified in this notice of decision.
3. APPEAL OF THIS DECISION
Pursuant to MN Rule 8420.0905, any appeal of this decision can only be commenced by mailing a petition
for appeal, including applicable fee, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of the mailing of this Notice
to the following as indicated:
one:
SSI Appeal of an LGU staff decision. Send Appeal of LGU governing body decision.
petition and $50_00 fee (if applicable) to: Send petition and $500 filing fee to:
Chanhassen City Council Executive Director
c/o Todd Gerhardt, City Manager Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
7700 Market Blvd, PO Box 147 520 Lafayette Road North
Chanahssen, MN 55317 St. Paul, MN 55155
4. LIST OF ADDRESSEES
® SWCD TEP member: Chip Hentges, Aaron Finke
® BWSR TEP member: Ben Meyer
❑ LGU TEP member (if different than LGU Contact):
® DNR TEP member (notice only):
® DNR Regional Office (if different than DNR TEP member):
® WD or WMO (if applicable): Claire Bleser, Riley -Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District
® Applicant (notice only) and Landowner (if different): David Vogel
® Members of the public who requested notice (notice only): Wayne Jacobson, Jacobson
Environmental, PLLC
® Corps of Engineers Project Manager (notice only) Melissa Jenny
❑ BWSR Wetland Bank Coordinator (wetland bank plan applications only):
BWSR Forms 11.25-09 Page 3
of 3
iu
5. MAILING INFORMATION
➢For a list of BWSR TEP representatives, am:
www.bwsr.state.ma.us/gboutbwsr/workat-eas/WCA areas pdf
➢For a list of DNR TEP representatives, see: www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wea/DNR TEP contacts.pdf
➢Department of Natural Resources Reginal OfRrpc-
NW Region:
IA E Regan
Central Reeion:
Southern ReQioa:
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol,
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Reg. Env. Assess.
Reg. Env. Assess. Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
Div. Ecol. Resources
Ecol.
Div. Ecol. Resources
2115 Birchmom Beach Rd.
1201 E. Hwy. 2
Div. Ecol, Resources
261 Hwy. 15 South
NE
Grand Rapids, MN
1200 Warner Road
New Ulm, MN 56073
Bemidji MN 56601
55744
St. Paul, MN 55106
V. a , F vc "INn numma;uuuve tcegrons, see: nttn:nnles.dur.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/dur regions pdf
➢For a list of Corps of Project Managers, see:
www.mvt).usace.army.mil/regulatorv/&,fault.asp?i)aiteid=687 or send to:
➢Dept. of the Army, Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District
ATTN: CO -R, 190 Fifth Street East
St. Paul, MN 55101-1638
➢For Wetland Bank Plan applications, also send a copy of the application to:
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
Wetland Bank Coordinator
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
6. ATTACHMENTS
In addition to the application, list any other attachments:
® Joint Water Resources Application for Approval of Wetland Type and Boundary, dated
October 26, 2015.
® Memorandum and Wettand Delineation Report, dated October 23, 2015.
BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page .4
of 3
APPENDIX F
Wetland Delineation Report
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com
Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
---------------------------------------------------------- -
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell
Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com
October 23, 2015
David Vogel
105 Pioneer Trail
Chanhassen, MN 55317
RE: Project Name: 9641 Meadowlark Lane Delineation
Comm. No.: 2015-234
Project Location: City of Chanhassen
T1 16N, R23W, Section 25
Project Description: Wetland Delineation Report
Dear David:
As discussed, Jacobson Environmental, PLLC. (JE) visited the above referenced site to perform an
official wetland delineation in accordance with the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Midwest Region.
Adjacent site land use includes residential lots, wetlands, woodlands, Lake Riley, and roadways on all
sides. This parcel is a combination of a woodland, and tnree wetlands at 9641 Meadowlark Lane in
Chanhassen, Minnesota. Figure 5 is a Wetland Delineation Map of the propertv. Figure 1 is a site
location map of the property. Al' figures referenced by this report are presented at the end of the text.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the project area, ident fy areas meeting the technical criteria
for wetlands, delineate the juriscictional extent of the wetland basins and classify the wetland habitat.
Woodland Species Noted Wet Meadow -Shallow Marsh Species
Trees
Cottonwood
Quaking Aspen
Box Elder
Red Maple
Silver Maple
Red Oak
Shrubs
Quaking Aspen
Common Buckthorn
Herbs
Herbs
Smooth Brome
Reed Canarygrass
Kentucky Bluegrass
Tusssock Sedge
Common Plantain
Stinging Nettle
Tall Goldenrod
Water Smartweed
Common Dandelion
Lake Sedge
Red Raspberry
Lesser Duckweed
White Clover
Jewelweed
Ground Ivy
Broadleaf Cattail
Wetland Delineation -Mitigation -Permitting -Monitoring -Banking -Functional Analysis -T & E Surveys 1
Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW's-Soil ID -Soil Analysis & Delineation-Envirorrnental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking -Tree Surveys -Natural Resource Management Plans
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com
Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
---------------------------------------- ------------------ -
- ------------------------------------------------
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell
Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com
The growing season for this site is approximately from 4/15 to 10115 where the air temperature averages
above 28 degrees F. The growing season in 2015 started in April. This site is in the big woods
subsection ecoregion according to Minnesota DNR and the annua precipitation averages 30.93 inches.
The presettlement vegetation was maple -basswood forest in this area.
The precipitation for the previous three months along with the comparison of the 10!6;15 precipitation
worksheet data was as follows:
2015 Wks Interpret Normal Dry Wet
Multi -month score (3"2) + (2.1) + (1.3) = 11 Normal (10 to 14 being normal)
The delineation was performed on October 6, 2015 and it is unlikely the precipitation totals in this period
affected the boundary of any wetlands in this delineation, since the period was norma'. Precipitation data
is located in Appendix A. This wetland delineation was performed and reported by Wayne Jacobson,
Minnesota Professional Soil Scientist #30611, Society of Wetland Scientists — Professional Wetland
Scientist #1000, University of Minnesota / BWSR Wetland Del neator, Certified #1019 American
Fisheries Society — Associate Fisheries Scientist #A-171.
Methodology
The wetlands on the subject property were delineated using the routine determination methodology set
forth in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetland boundaries here
determined through a routine analysis of the vegetation, soils and hydrology which must all show wetland
characteristics in order for an area to be delineated as a wetland. Wetlands are areas that are saturated
or inundated with surface and or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted nor life in hydric soi
conditions. Examples of wetlands inc ude seasonally flooded basins, floodplain forests, wet meadows,
shallow and deep marshes, shrub swamps, wooded swamps, fens, and bogs.
Vegetation
The plant species within the parcel were catalogued and assigned a wetland indicator status according to:
Lichvar, R.W., Buttenwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner, 2014. The National Wetland Plant List. 2,314
Update of Wetland Ratings, Phytonewon 2014-41: 1-42.
In the text of this report and on the enclosed data forms, the plant indicator status follows the plant's
scientific name unless a status has not been assigned. The hydrophytic plant criterion is met when more
than 50 percent of the dominant species by the 50/20 rule for each stratum (herb, shrub/sapling, tree. anc
woody vine) were assigned an ooligate (O8L)', facultative wet (FACW), andrer facultative (FAC) wetlano
status.
' OBL--Obligate Wetland, occurs an estimated 99% in wetlands. FACW==Facultative Wetland, has an estimated
67%-99% Probability ofoccurreoce in wetlands. FAC'=Facultative, is equ€Ily likely to occur in wctlands and non -
wetlands, 34°•u-664 probability. FACL'4acuttative l!pland, occurs in wetlands on.y occasionally. 1%-23",.
probability. UPL. Upland, almost never occults in wetlands, <:I'!o probabiFIN. NI— No Indicator. insaflicient
information available to determine an indi atol status. Positive or ne_ative sign previously ind-�catcd a frequency
toward higher (- ) or lower (-) frequency of occurrence with an category.
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functiotlal Analysis -T & E Surveys 2
Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW's-Soil ID -Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environrnental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking -Tree Surveys -Natural Resource Management Plans
Sept
Aug
July
Worksheet (Wks)
3.19'
2.82`
7.64 = NWS Data
30% less than
2.20
3.09
2.48
30% more than
4.15
5.33
4.86
2015 Wks Interpret Normal Dry Wet
Multi -month score (3"2) + (2.1) + (1.3) = 11 Normal (10 to 14 being normal)
The delineation was performed on October 6, 2015 and it is unlikely the precipitation totals in this period
affected the boundary of any wetlands in this delineation, since the period was norma'. Precipitation data
is located in Appendix A. This wetland delineation was performed and reported by Wayne Jacobson,
Minnesota Professional Soil Scientist #30611, Society of Wetland Scientists — Professional Wetland
Scientist #1000, University of Minnesota / BWSR Wetland Del neator, Certified #1019 American
Fisheries Society — Associate Fisheries Scientist #A-171.
Methodology
The wetlands on the subject property were delineated using the routine determination methodology set
forth in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetland boundaries here
determined through a routine analysis of the vegetation, soils and hydrology which must all show wetland
characteristics in order for an area to be delineated as a wetland. Wetlands are areas that are saturated
or inundated with surface and or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted nor life in hydric soi
conditions. Examples of wetlands inc ude seasonally flooded basins, floodplain forests, wet meadows,
shallow and deep marshes, shrub swamps, wooded swamps, fens, and bogs.
Vegetation
The plant species within the parcel were catalogued and assigned a wetland indicator status according to:
Lichvar, R.W., Buttenwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner, 2014. The National Wetland Plant List. 2,314
Update of Wetland Ratings, Phytonewon 2014-41: 1-42.
In the text of this report and on the enclosed data forms, the plant indicator status follows the plant's
scientific name unless a status has not been assigned. The hydrophytic plant criterion is met when more
than 50 percent of the dominant species by the 50/20 rule for each stratum (herb, shrub/sapling, tree. anc
woody vine) were assigned an ooligate (O8L)', facultative wet (FACW), andrer facultative (FAC) wetlano
status.
' OBL--Obligate Wetland, occurs an estimated 99% in wetlands. FACW==Facultative Wetland, has an estimated
67%-99% Probability ofoccurreoce in wetlands. FAC'=Facultative, is equ€Ily likely to occur in wctlands and non -
wetlands, 34°•u-664 probability. FACL'4acuttative l!pland, occurs in wetlands on.y occasionally. 1%-23",.
probability. UPL. Upland, almost never occults in wetlands, <:I'!o probabiFIN. NI— No Indicator. insaflicient
information available to determine an indi atol status. Positive or ne_ative sign previously ind-�catcd a frequency
toward higher (- ) or lower (-) frequency of occurrence with an category.
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functiotlal Analysis -T & E Surveys 2
Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW's-Soil ID -Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environrnental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking -Tree Surveys -Natural Resource Management Plans
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.com
Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
------------------------------------ ----------
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6614 Cell
Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com
With the 50/20 rule, dominants are generally measured by absolute % cover in each stratum which
individually or collectively account for more than 50% of total vegetative cover in the stratum, plus any
other species which itself accounts for at least 20% of the total vegetative cover.
Soils
A hydric soil is a soil formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the
growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper oart. If a soil exhibits the indicators of a
hydric soil or is identified as a hydric soil tie hydric soil criterion is met.
The break between hydric and non -hydric soils was determined by excavating soil pits along transects
crossing the wetland/upland eco -tone and evaluating the soil colon;, textures. and presence or absence
of redoximorphic indicators (i.e., mottles, gley or oxidized rhizospheres) Hydric Soil Indicators for the
Midwest Region were noted as presented in the National Technical Committee for Hy:tric Soils Field
Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States version 7.0 (USDA NRCS 2010) if present at each sample
point. Also, upper soil profiles were compared to the mapped or inclusionary soil series found in the
sample area for soil identification purposes.
Cautions used in aoplying the Field Indicators of Hvdric Soils
There are hydric soils with morphologies that are difficult to interpret. These include soils with black, gray,
or red parent material; soils with high pl-I; soils high or low in content of organic matter; recently
developed hydric soils, and soils high in iron inputs. In some cases we do not currently have indicators to
assist in the identification of hydric soils in these situations. As long as the soil meets the definition of a
hydric soil, the lack of an indicator does not preclude the soil from being hycric. The indicators were
developed mostly to identify the boundary of hydric soil areas and generally work best on the margins.
Not all of the obviously wetter hydric soils will be identified by the indicators. Redoximorphic features are
most likely to occur in soils that cycle between anaerobic (reduced) and aerobic (oxidized) conditions.
Morphological features of hydric soils indicate that saturation and anaerobic conditions have existed
under either contemporary or former hydrologic regimes. Where sod morphology seems inconsistent with
the landscape, vegetation, or observaole hydrology, it may be necessary to obtain the assistance of an
experienced soil or wetland scientist to determine whether the soil is hydric.
To clarify on some Carver County sites.
1. Many of these soils have black or gray parent materials
2. Many of the soils have a high organic matter content
3. The hydric soil margin is typically higher than the wetland boundary margin on the site
4. Not all of the obviously wetter soils will be identified by the indicators
5. Many of the hydric soils are Mollisols which are classic prob em hydric soils in many cases
Wetland Classification
Wetland classifications discussed in the -ext are set forth in Wetlands and Daapwater Habitats of the
United States (FWS/OBS Publication ;'9131, Cowardin at at. 1979) and Wetlands of the United States
(USFWS Circular 39, Shaw and -redine, 1971.) Additionally, plant community types as named by Eggers
and Reed (1998) are given.
Topographic maps, National Wetlands Inventory maps, the Web Soil Survey, Aerial Photographs, and
DNR Protected Waters maps were consulted to locate potential wetland habitats.
Wetland Delineation -Mitigation -Permitting -Monitoring -Banking -Functional Analysis -T & E Surveys
Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAWPs-Soil ID -Soil Analysis & Celineation-Environmental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking -Tree Surveys -Natural Resource Management Plans
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmentai.com
Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D,C., P,W.S., A.F.S.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell
Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com
The Routine On-site Determination Method was used on this site. In this method, the following
procedures were used:
1) The vegetative community was sampled in all present strata to determine
whether 50% of the dominant plant species were hydrophytic using the 50/20 method.
2) Soil pits were dug using a dutch auger to depths of 18"40", noting soil profiles and any
hydric soil characteristics.
3) Signs of wetland hydro ogy were noted and were compared to field criteria such as depth
to shallow water table and depth of soil saturation found in the soil pits.
Wetland edges were marked with orange numbered pin flags. 4 -foot wood lath marked with orange
"wetland boundary" flagging tape or flagging tied on vegetation may be used if site conditions warrant
Any wetlands were mapped using modern survey methods by others. At least one sample point transect
crosses each delineated wetland edge. These transects consist of ar. upland sample point, and a
wetland sample point. Other sample points may be located in areas which have one or more of the
wetland vegetation, soils, or hydrologic characteristics present, or where questionable conditions exist.
Sample points are marked with orange pin flags with a pink ribbon tied on them. Sample data sheets are
found in Appendix B.
Results
Basin 1
Basin 1 is a PEMCd ditched Type 3 shallow marsh comprised of 3% broadleaf cattail, 50% reed
canarygrass, 5% jewelweed, 30% open water. and 10% lesser duckweed along with a few other species.
The wetland boundary was typically a transition from common buckthorn to reed canarygrass with a
topographic break. The soils changed from dry Hamel soil to saturated Hamel soil in the wetland. Soil
saturation was present in the wetland, and hydrology disappeared in the upland.
Basin 3
Basin 3 is a PEM/SS1B ditched Type 2/6 wet meadow/shrub swarrp comprised of 60% sandbar willow as
shrubs, 40% reed canarygrass, 20% jewelweed, 20% stinging nettle, and 10% great ragweed along with
a few other species. The wetland boundary was typically a transition from common buckthorn to reed
canarygrass with a topographic break The soils changed from dry Hamel soil to saturated Hamel soil in
the wetland. Soil saturation was present in the wetland, and hydrology disappeared in the upland.
Basin 4
Basin 4 is a PEMF Type 4 deep marsh comprised of 5% swamp smartweed 20% reer, canarygrass, 1044:
coontail, 35% open water, and 30% lesser duckweed along with a few other species. The wetland
boundary was typically a transition from common buckthorn to reed canarygrass with e' topographic
break. The soils changed from dry Hamel soil to saturated Hamel soil in the wetland. Soil saturation was
present in the wetland, and hydrology disappeared in the upland.
Wetland Delineation -Mitigation -Permitting -Monitoring -Banking -Functional Analysis -1- & E Surveys 4
Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW's-Soil ID -Soil Analysis & Delineation -Environmental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking -Tree Surveys -Natural Resource Management Plans
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC www.jacobsonenvironmental.corn
Environmental Consultants Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5521 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 (612) 802-6619 Cell
Email: jacobsonenv@msn.com
The National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) (Figure 2) identifies Basir 4 on the subject site.
According to the DNR Public Waters Map (PWI) (Figure 4) of Carver County there are no DNR Pub is
Waters on the property.
According to the Web Soil Survey (Figure 3) the following hydric soils existed on the parcel:
Hamel
Photographs of the site s wetlands are presented in Appendix C.
Confirmation of Jurisdictional Status
We are submitting this report to the Cient and regulatory agencies to request a wetland boundary and
type determination. We have enclosed an official WCA Approval o` Wetland Type and Boundary form ir.
Appendix D along with a USCOE wetland delineation concurrence request.
Conclusion
This wetland delineation meets the standards and criteria described in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2010 Regional Supolement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation: Midwest Region. Tris was a Routine Or Site Determination anc the results reflect
the conditions present at the time of the delineation.
If any wetland impacts are planned for this project, permits would be necessary from the LGU (City of
Chanhassen) and other agencies.
I certify that I performed the field analysis and wrote the report for this wetland delineation. Thank you for
the opportunity to provide wetland services on this important project
Wa�E. Jacobson
Professional Soil Scientist #30611
Professional Wetland Scientist #1000
Wetland Delineator, Certified #1019
Associate Fisheries Scientist #A-171
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC,
Regulators: Terry Jeffery, City of Chanhassen
Ryan Maltrud, USCOE
Chip Hentges, Carver SWCD
Ben Meyer. BWSR
Date
Wetland Delineation -Mitigation -Permitting -1 lonitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis -T' & E Surveys 5
Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW's-Sail ID -Soil Analysis & Delineation -Environmental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking -Tree Surveys -Natural Resource Management Plans
FIGURES
93-33.000' W Figure 1 Site Location Map
93`132.00W IV 93-31.007 W WGS84 93-30.0W II
gn,
J
Lakcjsusc,14 tj
b11 dah 7.7;-
[tic,
ZA
0
MIA! rqa N P/11"i
9f f
Ya. Co
I'll NVIYA-1
. . . . . . . . . . . .
all
4
V) 70
A F,
k . . . . . . .
Amu-Im
212
41
411 ul -4
t-Imp
M.a.
MaCr -'d
_02007 NatlprJafCgdgraphicc)2 A
93-33.00.01 w 93-32.00- 9303 1L \N1—
1.000, IN WGS84 93030.000- IV
NATIONALto Rt IN'Mfq
GEOGRAPHIC
� !!{,!\i!�)\ \!!/;){ !!�\§ \
|\�` ® `:/!!= o
Sod Map—Carver County. Minnesota
Map unit Legend
Carver county, Minnesota (1111,1019)
Map Unn Symbol -
Map Unit Name Acres i0 AOI
HM__—_._�—_...___._..
Hamel loam. 0 10 :2 percent
slopes
KB2 Lesley -Kilkenny foams. 2 to 6
Percent slopes. eroded
KC2 Lester-Kilkeriny loanls. filo 12
Percent slopes, eroded
KF2 Lester -Kilkenny loans. 1810 25
Percent slopes. eroded
MK MusKego and Houghton sods.0
to 1 percent slopes
NO3 Lester -Kilkenny clay foams. 12
to 18 percent slopes, severely
eroded
W Water
Totals for Area of Interest
Fic.ne :3 Soils Map
041 "e 1"k
02 24°,.
1 5 19 3'L
06 7.7"!0
7.8 100.0"/e
,m Natural Resources
Web Soil Survey
"a"s � Conservation Service 10/ ,'2015
National Cooperative Soil Survey
..'.:ge 3 of 3
Percent of AOI
4 A
52 1 Y.
0.2
2 7'k
0.3
34%.
041 "e 1"k
02 24°,.
1 5 19 3'L
06 7.7"!0
7.8 100.0"/e
,m Natural Resources
Web Soil Survey
"a"s � Conservation Service 10/ ,'2015
National Cooperative Soil Survey
..'.:ge 3 of 3
Figure 4
DNR Public Waters Inventory Nlap
TN Jacobson Environmental, PLLC
Approximate Scale 1" = 5,280' Project No. 2015-234
Property d�rd
Parcel �ID
_T Number 25742101, Figure 6 Site Malp
„RVI J�
Ol VI
o,po
tlu I S CA Z:�Y, Uctobe 1 22. 2015
C.';w'.] Col"lly, ow
O
CL
PM
ce
Q
�
�
�
N
g
LM
�
.�
LL
.
G((
�
!
//}
/m
/
9\
}
\2
3
/}\
,
$)/
!�
Buy,
,
),!$!
!;!
!
\2;
/n!a
/
:12
p
!E
�
y�
�\
!
�\/
\/
(
1129
/
Eel
SIM
e$1!
/
/\!
/:�
2RC
\:
(
/\/
&!e
o
2,\
APPENDIX A
Precipitation Data
Precipitation Documentation Worksheet Using Gridded Database page ', ol'2
Minnesota Climatology Working Group,;21
State Climatology Office - DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources University of Minnesota
home current conditions I journal I past data I summaries I agriculture I other sites I contact us I search
0
Precipitation Worksheet Using Gridded Database
Precipitation data for target wetland location:
county: Carver township number: 116N
township name: Lake Minnewashta range number: 23W
nearest community: Shakopee section number: 25
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Score using 1971-2000 normal period
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
first prior month:
second prior third prior
(values are in inches)
September
month morth
(values are in incites)
September
August July
month
2015
2015
estimated precipitation total for this location:
_
missing _
_2015_
_missing 7.64
there is a 30% chance this location will have
less than:
2.01
3.12 2.76
there is a 30% chance this location will have
_2015
2.$k i
2015
more than:
3.57
4.94 5.05
type of month: dry normal wet
missing
missing t
monthly score
missing_
missing 1 * 3 = 3
there is a 3011,chance this location will have
multi -month score:
--
6 to 9 (dry) 10 to 14 (normall 15 to 18 (wet)
missing
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
t = NWSIAAfiIA
first prior month
second prior
third prior
(values are in incites)
September
month.
month
August
July
2015
_
3,1y + _
_2015
2.$k i
2015
estimated precipitation total for this location:
7.64
there is a 30%chance this location will have
---`--
less than:
2.20
3.09
2.45
there is a 3011,chance this location will have
--
---
more than:
4.15
5.33
4.t3fi
type of month: dry normal wet
n.a I'
Qry Wet
monthly scop _
x Z=�,
http:i;climate.anal.edu/gridded_data,'1�rrcipaetixndiwork,heet.asp?passXuun83-458011... ILir'?: ;:!+)15
Iilgh DLNsity radius retrieval 07 1210 Page I of I
Minnesota Climatology Working Group c;t)
State Climatology Office - DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources UniversIty of Mmne:ota
home cu•rent conditions I journal I past data I summaries I agriculture I other sites I contact us search I
Nearest Station Precipitation Data Retrieval
Minnesota's precipitation data archive is searched for data closest to a selected target location for each month:. Values
from the site closest to the target location are returned below after clicking the retrieve monthly data or retrieve daily
data buttons. The precipitation data are made up of measured rainfall and the measured liquid content of snowfall.
Temperature, snowfall, and snow depth data from National Weather Service reporting stations are no longer
retrieved from this application. To obtain those data, see our newest data retrieval tool (May 2C14) National Weather
Service precipitation data continue to be available from this application.
Obtaining data for legal purposes
Guide for column headers in the data table
target location: Carver -Lake minnewashta-Shakopee 116N 23W S25 (latitude: 44.82634lorgitude'. 93.53116)
click to select target location
years: 12015 v: to!2� 015 v,
number of missing days allowed per month: f3
.._
remeve monthly dot tlata retrieve daily data
results:
Target: T116 R23 S25
mon year CC tttN rr-W ss nnnn
Jan 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
Feb 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
Mar 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
Apr 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
May 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
Jun 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
Jul 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
Aug 2015 10 116N 23W 23 BYRG
Sep 2015 10 116N 23W 15 NWS
Oct 2015 in
Nov 2015 in
Dec 2015 in
00000000 pre (inches)
is
.24
1 mi.
.33
1. mi.
.85
2.14
1 mi.
4
1 mi.
.34
3.50
1. mi.
7.83
1. mi.
2.82
1, ri .
CHAN_NWS 3.19
1. rot'
2
999 ri.
mi.
999 mi.
999 ni.
Yinete a:aca:M lfissmg aalaeS are 6Cawn as 'r cays an v.n:Cn amnp apcumNab:fmane aa9a are snowy.as'-'T"1!tH iSsPu'poo v:uta auvey.'s;'-v?egal'locapo.nl!m:
ops. eC Uala sect.0, 69ya n'JF. eest-1Ic" r— ircarNns o..8 ,a -N AS ID" We Na:.ona: Y.Or Sery I,fxpe•alve s!a:-an romper NC.!Viit she PL S'aap to �a
aa:.eta'l a the Nn51C w II aIla, 6 pe grteel for the temperature care II ro Pi S , no al :oa MAS D' numon appies+o a':: spoon pato
State Climatology Office - MnDNR - Ecological and Water Resources
http://cIinnate.unlnxiJUMIDradius/radius_new.asp I0/27n(115
APPENDIX B
Sample Data Sheets
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Regior
F ro;ecUSde City/County
Aoplicant/Owner
=Gim,ts�� _SamplirgDate:
_��,� � �
---_ ,fes[ _Sampling Point:_ I _Up
Irvestigator(s): Wig= Slate:
Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslcpe, terrace, etc.;: -£ TIi RZ10
�I;i Local relief (concave, convex. none):-
— •s
Long:_Datum.
Soil Map Unit Name_ (tq� t _ 44NI Classificat.or,
A -e climatic/hydroloylc conditions of the site lypicai for this time of the year? _�/ of no. explain it -ire, -narks)
Are vegetationsoil
�_ _ or hydrology _ significantly disturbed % Are "no Circumstances"
Are vegetation �_, NGS , or hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS �- presen('7
(If neededexplain any answers in remarks.I
Hydrophylic vegetation present? y_ C ---
Hydric son present? _ Y Is the sampled area within a wetlan �-
Wetland hydrology present?_ i f yes, optional wetland site ID.
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. —
Tree Stratum (Plot size: sr )
t JTC�=
2 A „r
-1 14ql
4L..�s
SaolingiShrub stratum (Plot size:
t
Herb stratum (Plot size: �rvls� I
Absolute Dominan Irdicato
% Cover t Species Staus
Total Cover
0 =Total Cover C�
hif PAL.
d _
10 _-
�_ = -
',Noodv vine stratum (Plot size, Total Cover a �r..,.J
i
0 =Total Cover _
remarks- (Include photo numbers here or or a separate =_heel)
uommance Test Worksheet _
Number of Domi-,ant Species
thaf are OBL, FAC M. or FAC:!{t., _ (A)
Total Number of Dominant
£Peres Acrc is all Strata:_ (gy
Percent Of Doini-ant Species
that are OBL, FA --W, or FAC:
Total % Cover of:
OBC species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
0 x1=
C x2=
C x3=
C x4=
UPL species C X5=
Column totals —CIA)
Prevalerce Index = 6/A =
I4apic test fcr hydrephytio vegetati n
Dominance test -s >50%
_ Prevalerce index is =3.0-
Morphocica adaptations' (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on ,
—separate shsrep
Problematic hydrophytic vegeteten'
_(explain)
'Inc cators of nydr : soil ants rvevane hyd01e9v ;rust b--
Present,
epresent, ul'less d st'Jroee or probielnal c
vegetation
present?
US Amy Corps of Engineers
Midwest Region
SOIL
Profile DesCriDtlon: IDescrihr rn the de +i,
Sampling Point: �Up
--r•••• _.. r� vucumem me ulmcator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)Depthoi Redox Features— driches)Color (moist) % Type' Loc" Texture Remarks
-
--
-
Water le ( _Aquatic
High Water Table (A2)
Fauna (B13)
__Surface Sc I Cracks (85)
_True
Saturation (A3)
Aquatic Plants (814)
_ Drainage F 3tterns (810)
-pry-Seaso
_Hydrogen
Water Marks (81)
Sulfide Odor (CI)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots
Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (ca)
Sediment Deposits (82)
Drift Depos:ts(B3)
(C3)
—Saturation disible or Ae-r!al Ima r Cr
ge ! ' ��)
_
Algal Mat or Gust (84)
Presence of Reduced L•on ICa)
Stunted or :;tressed Plants :DI)
:non Deposits (85)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tiled Soils
(C6)
_Geomorpt:o Position (D:2)
,'Tfpe: C = Concentration, D = Depletion. RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Gains ""Location PL = Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Probieinatic Hydric Soils:
_Histisol (Al) _Sand,/ Gleyec Matrix (S41 Coast Prairie Redox (A161 iLRR K, L, R)
Black Histic on (A2) _ Sandy Reoox (S5) _ Dark Surface (S7) ;LRR K, L)
_ Black en S lfid —Stripped Matrix (S6) ^5 cm Mucky Peat 1:r Peat (S3) (LRR K, L. R)
Hydrogen Sulfide 5) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Iron -Manganese Masses 11712) (LRR K, L, R;
—Stratified Layers (AS) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) __ Very S)allow Dark Surface (TF 12)
2 cm Muck (A40) --k Depleted Matrix (F3) _ Diner (explain in remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1) _Redox Dark Surface (F6) _
_Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Depleted Dark Surface (177) 'Intl catcrs of hydrophytic vegetation and %ieilano
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Redox Decressions (F8) hIr I
_5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
(inches)
Y < o ogy must be present, unless cisturt:ed or
p-oblematic
Hydric soil present- -.-
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-
--
Pri nary Irdicators fminimum of ore -s reauire(i check all that apply) -' --1 Seconotar India tors minireum o' ewo -ei uirec
Surface
Water le ( _Aquatic
High Water Table (A2)
Fauna (B13)
__Surface Sc I Cracks (85)
_True
Saturation (A3)
Aquatic Plants (814)
_ Drainage F 3tterns (810)
-pry-Seaso
_Hydrogen
Water Marks (81)
Sulfide Odor (CI)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots
Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (ca)
Sediment Deposits (82)
Drift Depos:ts(B3)
(C3)
—Saturation disible or Ae-r!al Ima r Cr
ge ! ' ��)
_
Algal Mat or Gust (84)
Presence of Reduced L•on ICa)
Stunted or :;tressed Plants :DI)
:non Deposits (85)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tiled Soils
(C6)
_Geomorpt:o Position (D:2)
_
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Thin .Muck Surface (C7)
FAC-Neutrd Test (D5)
—
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88) —Gauge
or Well Data (D9)
_
Water -Stained Leaves (89) _
Otner (Explain in Remarks)
Fiel nervations:
Su -face water present? Yes No
c Depth (inches). �.._.
Wells 1d
Water table prsent? Yes - No
Saturation present? Yes
-
_Depth (inches) 72�
hydro ogy
No
(includes capillary fringe)
_�_ Depth (inches):
prose it?
-_-
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well,
aerial photos, previous inspections), if availatle:
Re•narks.
�..
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
p WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
Project/Site ! (AAs �L
�.[ -yr / +„_Q CitylCounty. Garalu__grn Sampling Cate
irveApplstanti r(s): _�u State' _Sam I -�
Irvestigator(s): (N�..r -.n`%o p: `gig Pnin:
lection, Tovmship, Range: �:�� Tj24 at&l .RZIA)
Landform (hiIlslOpe, terrace, etc. ;sr,�� Local relief (concave, convex, none)
6.oilS'oM 4/o): �_ Lat: r _ Long: _Datum
Soil Map Unit Name_ TNI Gassification: �M� -
A•e climaticlhydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?_ I� (If no, explain in remarks)
ke vegetationil so , or h drolo
�. Y 9y_,&_ significantly disturbed? Are "no'mal circumstances"
A"e vegetation —�, soil -- or hydrology_ naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS present?-�
(It needed, exp sin any answers in rer..arks.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? _� � --�
Hydric soil present? �� Is the sampled area within a wetlaa_
Wetland hydrology present? _y f yes, optional wetland site ID.
(Explain alterralive procedures here or in a separate repor,.)
r ww -- vae sclentlnc names of plants.
—
Absolute oomman Ird;c,to
Tree Stratum (Plot size: w� ) °/� Cover t Species Staus
Dominance Test Worksheet
1
Number of Ogmi)ant Spaces
:hat are OBL, FACW, or FAC:——(q)
2 __ _
3
Total Number of Dominant
4
Spec as AcrCss all Strata:,
i
_
Percent of Domirant Species
_
0
that are OBL, FA W, or FAQ ��e
=Total Cover
_tq/gi
_
3aoling/Shrub stralun (Plot size: t S•u1,,L ) -- -
I
Prevalence Index Worksheet
Total % Cover of.
3
OBL species C x 1 �= 0
FACW species C x 2= 0
5 -
FAC species C x 3 !- q
FACL' species 0 x 4 = p
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Column 0'
_
0 = Total Cover
Herb stratum (Plot size: Sxr,,'J
totals {q} j
g)
; _- ..t.. �_ _ 30 �o _ F�t
Prevalence Inde e = B/A = `--
�p�e t��—�:�'•:a-.---- _ 2,L �_ OSL-
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
;f —.Z2_ PBL
Rapid test for by:rephytic vegetation
A
fi —
Commerce test is>50%
Prevalence idex is <3.0'
—Morphogice:
t; -- _
adaptations" (provide
g -
supporting cata it Remarks or on s
10
_separate sheet)
Total Cover
Problematic nydropnytic vegetalior'
(explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size.'Ja ice_
—
1
'Indicators of hydro; mi ane wet'eid •".yd o Dg:- r,u,
CE.
2
present, us ess d:sturoetl or prohie:nal c
fly rop yho
0 -Ter
otal Cov
vegetation
present? �%
iemarks. (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
—'--" --F— —
US Amy Corps of Engineers
Midwest Region
SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth nee
Depth Matrix
(Inches Color (moist) % Cc or (mo',
C = Concentration. D = Depletion, RM =
_ Histisol (Al)
_ Hislic Epipedon fA2)
_ Black Histic tA.3)
_ Hydrogen Suifide (Ak)
Stratified Layers (A5)
T 2 cm Muck (At 0)
_ Dep!eted Below Dark Surface (All)
_Thick Dark Surface (At 2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (St)
_ 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
(oches).
Sc -face Water (At)
Higr Water Table (A2)
Satura!ion (A3)
Water Marks (81)
Sediment Deposits (82)
Drift Deposits (83)
Algal Mat or Crust (84)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Vslble on Aerial Imagery (137)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Water -Stained Leaves (89)
e water present? "es
table present? "es
tion present? ves
as caoillary frinoe)'--
Sampling Point: �.
to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Sox Features-
Type' Loc'" Texture Remarks
= Masked Sard Grains. "Loceticn: P_ = Pore Lilvr:a, V = fvlaotx
_ Sandy G.eyed Matrix (S4;
Sandy Redox (S5)
�Strippad Matrix (S6)
_ '_oamy Mucky Mineral (171)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F71
Redox Depressions •;F8)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A18) (LRR K, L. Rt
Dark Sur`ace (Si') (LRR K, L)
�5 cm Mucky Pea: or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R1
Iron-Ivlaoganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L. R)
— Very Shallow Dark Surface (rF12)
— Olhe- (explain in remarks)
'Ind cators of hydrophytie vegetation and weltand
hydrology must ba present. dnlasS dis:drbed o.
Problematic
Hydric soil present? _Y
Aqua:ic Fauna (B13)
—True Aquatic Plants (6141
_ iydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Ox;d-zed Rh?zospheres 09 Living Rocas
_ C3)
_Presence of Reduced Iroo (C4;
Recent Pon Reduction in Tilled Scils
_ fC6)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
�OtYer (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B5)
'_Drainage Patterns (810)
Dry -Season Water Taba (C2)
Crayfish Barrows (C8)
Saturation Vis ble on Aeeal-maciery (C9)
Stunted er Slressed Plants (D1)
_& Geomorphic Position iD2)
;X_ FAC -Neutral Test (D51
No_ _ Depth (inches): '--' Wetland
No Depth (inches): jNo No Gep:h (6iches): present? Y
Describe recorded data (stream :gauge, monitoring well; aerial photos, previous;;nspecllons), if available:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Midwest Region
PrgecUSlte &� I WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
,
1 City/County: %i1wiSampiigDate
Applicant/Owner: s. JD�(pl/s
u � State'
Investigator(s)."'
_ �ygy-- ---MA/ —Sampling Poinl:_1—(2,e
3ectior, Township. Range: none ys T/J r
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.)_1�s1�_ Loca! relief (concave, convex,, none)-T�
Slope I%): Let: G9vrv's.•c�
Long: Datura:
Soil Map Unit Name—
�J'WI Classification:
Are climaticihydrologlc conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? y_ (If no, explain in remarks)
Are vegetation fJ_, soil
"Aj , or hydrology _ALsignificantly disturbed" Are "r ermacircumstances"
Are vegetation _—p, sdil I or hydrology_ V naturally protlematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —iy— present?
(If resided, explain any answers it remarks.)
Hydrophytic vegetation present?
Hydric soil present? Iy the sampled area within a wetlam�,J
Wetland hydrology present? f es, optic nal wetlanc site ID:
(Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
vtht IA I IVN -- Use scientific names of plants.
---
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
Absolute Dominan Indic atcr
Dominance Test Worksheet
si )
I
% Cover t Species Stau:;
Number of Dorr•mant Species
[hat are OBL• FACW, or FAC .g
3
_(A)
Total Number of Dominant
4
Species Across a'„ Strata'.—_
(Bi
5
Percent of Dominant Species
—
that are DEL. FACW, or FAC: ��
(A;B)
0 =Total Cover
_
SaofinoiShrub stratum (Plot size: tS•u��
_
)
Prevalence Index Worksheet
Tote.I % Cover cC
_
OSL. species 0 x 1 =
FACW species 0 x2= �p
FAC species C x 3-
"__
FACU species 0 x 4 = p •
Herbr
stratum (Plot size: )
0 =Total Cover
—'
UPL species - 0 x 5= 0—
.Ztloi�
COIL Mr Iota s C= (A) 0
(B)
4 -o— y rz&�
Prevalerce Index = SIA = y_
3
- 30-
t _.
_ Zp
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
r
_
—Rapid test fcr hydrophy6o vegetation.
L Dominance test a =•5o%
Prevaleri is 3.0'
g
Morphogical adaptations' (provide
9
—.—.— __
supporting data in Remarks or on a
_separate sheet)
r
1J
_
Problematic hydrophytic vegetal cr'
=Total Cover
(explain)
INoodv vine stratum (Plot size: _�o i)
—��
—
'Ind
Gators of hydri•- soil and weCand by Loli mcsl
oa
___ _
present. urless o sturoed or p,wemai c
__.
iy rop t�TtTc ---
0 -Total Cover
vegetation
present?
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or or a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers
Midwest Region
SOIL
Sampling Point:
„N•,� veto me ceptn needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicati
FT
Matrix
Color
C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RIA =
_ Histisol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Hislic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Mack (A10)
_ Dep eled Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
^Sandy Mucky Mineral (St)
_5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Type:
Depth (inches).
MS = Masked Bard Grains.
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Siripped Matrix (S6)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Radox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_Redox Depressions (F8j
Ren;rk=_
PL = Pore Lln ng, M = Mama
Coast Prairie Redox (A'6) (LRR K, L. R)
Dark Sur'ace (Sr') (LRR K, L)
_5 cm Mucky ?ea: or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L. R)
Lron-Manganese Masses (F'2 (LRR K, L. R}
Very Shallow Dark Surface (i`12)
'Othe, (expiain it remarks)
'Indicators of h.ydrophyGc vegetelion anti a✓altano
hydrology must be present, un ess disturbed or
Problematic
Flydric soli present? N
Vletland Hydrology Indicators:
Fri^lary Incicators (minkrcm of one is reouired: cheolt ail that apply`
Surface
:ordary lonicatcrs frmmrrjrr Of lrro re
Water (A1)
High
.Aq vatic Fauna (813)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) cLu,'red,
Water Table (A2)-
Saturationris
__ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Drainage PaCerns (BiL;
Water Marks {
(B;)
_ Hydrogen SuYide Odor (Cl)
__ Dry.Season Water Table (C2;
_
Sediment Deposits (62)
Oxidized Rhizospneres 01 Living RoCle Cra fish. Surrows!C8)
— y , '
Drift Deposits (83)
;C3)
resence of Recuce9 Iron (C4;
__Saturation Vis bta on Aerie feria, (C9.
Stunted
_Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_
Recent Pon Reduct.on in Tilled 30;.s
__ :.r Strassed Plants ;O1 I
Geomorphic Positron 02)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
;C6)
—'.Thin Muck Surface (C7)
FAC -Neutral Test (D51
'—
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Water -Stained Leaves (8 9)
'Field
_
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Observations:
Surface water present? Yes
--
No Depth (inches): _:—
Wetland
I Water table present? veS
Saturation present? "es
No Depth (inches):
No --�- —;s 24
hydrology
(i nc!udes capillary fringe)
_,,—Oapth (inches): __�
present?
-lY__ s t
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring
.
we!:, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers —
Midwest Region
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
P'oject/Site I (o4.CityrCounty: C,y1ft
hcfrsrr _Sampling Date. Jp /
AoplicanVOwner � � / State: � �'S
�� ,�yA/ _Sampling Poim; —LJFT'
Investigator(s) hilisl Wert Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.;: -f-�
.�u..� _ Local relief (concave, convex, none): r
5 oPe (°�°i' Lal:
Long:_ Datum:
Sail Map Unit Name i _
t'o-VI Classi'icat.on:
Are climatio/hydrologlc conditions of the site lyplcal for this hme of the year? pf no, explain in re narks) W
Are vegetation soil or h drolo
_ `L' .� hydrology A significantly disturbed
Are vegetation soil T Are "ncrmal circumstances'
�_ - �� , or hydrologytV ma�id? naturally proble°e , � �
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - (If needed, explain any answersin rerna
Hydrophytic vegetation present? _ )
Hydric soil present? I Is the sampled area within a wetlan,
Wetland hydrology present? �_ f yes, optional wetland site 10:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a sepa^ate report.)
• —.-- .. �. -- vac -Ilui nuc ndfne5 Of plants.
ree Stratum
f
Absolute Dominan Indicator
(Plot size: 3. ) '/, Cover t Speces Steve
Dominance Test Worksheet
I
�"'�
glli
Number of Domivant Species
if lith
+404 a /—
that are 0i ior FAC:
3
_
—(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata
:i
Percent of Dornwant Species
Ihal are OBL, FAOW, or FAC: Op
(AiB:
�C =Total Cover
—
(iaplindlShrub slratun (Plot size: IS�lA1 )
Prevalence Index Worksheet
�_ ��W
Total % hover -, ,
.j
_
OBL species 0 x t = 0
<I
_
_
FACW species —Ox 2 = 0
FAC species 0 X3=
5555
555,5 _
FACU species —Ox 4 = 3
=Total Cover
UPL species —Ox 5 =
rierb stratum
(Plot size: �erb�
Column totals 0 -iB)
(A)
�_ �_i
Prevalence Index = B/A =
A ns4
'�Ra%rrS�
.s ZQ_
'f` `Z_1, (g _gyp
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
c
Rapid test for hydropny;ic vegetation
6
_.
Dominance :est is >50%
Prevalence idex is 553.0-
E,
Morphogical adaptations' (pro/:de
supporting data it Remarks or on a
tr.
_
separate sheet)
_,
=Total Cover
Prob.ematic nydrophyfic vegetation"
(explain)
Woody vine stratum
(Plot size:—
t
'Indicalcrs of hydur. soil ano vrePald nydrobgy r+iist
be
2
present, u• ess d, sturbed or prOble=lat¢
Hy roP ytfc '—'--
0 =Total Cover
vegetation
present?
Re narks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL
to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the
Color (moist) °/, 1 Color (moist) °/, Type' Loc" Text ire
Sampling Point:
.lice of Indicator
R
2 a
Prroar�incioators (minimum o+one is reouiIncicators (minirum o+one is reouiad: check
Type C -0 anD = Depletion, RfA = Reduced Mamy.. AIS = Masked Sard Grains. ^Locet cm: PL = Pore Lin
Hydrn,
i ic SoiIndicators:
Hisbc
Surface Water (Al)
H;gn Water Table (A2)
ng Iv - Nia;r;x
Indicators for Problsmatic Hydrlc Soils:—'�
Ep.pe
His6c Eppedal (N2)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (Saj
Coast Prairie Redox (A`� 6) (LRR I(, L. R';
_Black Hislic (A3)
_Sand Retlo
Y tr (S5)
� Dark Surface (S'') (LRR K, L) '
Hydrogen Sulfide A4' r
Stripped Matrix (S6
�— )
o ;
— 5 cm Mucky Pee: or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L. R)
i(
_StratiMu Layers (A5)
_Loatroy Mucky Mineral (F i)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
—Ver
_ 2 cm Muck (A i0)
'—' Depleted Matrix (F3)
Shallow Dark Su
Y arks) ('fFt'e)
Other (explain in remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1:,
Redox Dark Sarface (F6)
—
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Mucky
Depleted Dark Surface (F7 1
iR=_dex
'Indicators of hydi pphytic vegetation and wellard
_Sandy
eat or
5 cm Mucky Peal or Peat (S3)
eat (
Depressions ;F6)
hydrology must b=. present, unless disturbed or
—
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
proclematic
Type:
Depth (inches).
__Darin linches):
Hydric soil presert?
Remarks:
Depth laches —��
)'—.!rl2—
--
L
Depth ,irches ):
present?
HYDROLOGY
earls: photos, previous inspections),
I
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prroar�incioators (minimum o+one is reouiIncicators (minirum o+one is reouiad: check
all that a�1,»»
Se^ rdar Inmcators mimmui* cf 1J�G'e^,;i'e"'
`'�--1--L--._-__
Surface Water (Al)
H;gn Water Table (A2)
Aq.ato Fauna (Bt"s)
-_.��
__Surface iioil Cracks (I's6)
s (1 6
Saturation (P.3) .r
True Aquatic Plants (B 14)
Surfacer Patterns
--
Water (darks (B7) --
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
p
_— Dry-Sea:;cn Water Table (C2;
—
Deposits (82)
Oxidized Rhizospheres o-•. Living Roots __ Crayrish; Burrows CB;
_Sediment
Drift Deposits ^
;C3)
Presence of Reduced lro-_ l.C4'.
Saturatic r Visible or. Aer•a Imseerr tC9)
�—Stunted x St-essed Plants ; C 1)
atorCrist
Algal Mat or Crust (ea)
Deposits
Recent iron Reduction in Tilled Soils
_ GeomoqPhic Position fD21
-t—Iron, (B5)
Inuncation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) —
;C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
FAC -Neutral eutral Test (on)
Sparsely Vegetated C011 -cave Suface (BS) !Gauge
or Weal Data (09)
Wafer -Stained Leaves (89)
(Explain in Remarks)
_Other
Fie�servations:
_
Surface wafer present? Yes No
__Darin linches):
Wetland
Water table present? `!es No
Saturation present? Yes �— N
Depth laches —��
)'—.!rl2—
hydrology
�Fco
(ir,� udes capillary fringe)
Depth ,irches ):
present?
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, mon.toring well,
earls: photos, previous inspections),
if available:
Remar s
_
I "
US Army Corps of Engineers
Midwest Region
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
ProjecVSte Q64,f �. .,_ �� ,
eQ City/County C{.tyojy<1y*�_ Sampling Date: JnL��
ApplicanVOwner: State,
Mro SamplincPoink ,4,—Lrr�
Investigator(s): (�Ky rection, l'ownship. Range: 'r
Landform (hdislope, terrace, etc.): is;)(sle,� Local relief (concave, convex,, nosne):
Slope (%): _ Let Long: Datum: Soil Map Map Unit Name f -• ---_
_vWl Classification:
Are climatiC/hydrologlc conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? _ y (If no, explain in remarksl
Are vegetation soil V , or hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation _�, soil _ y 3Y _ j� naturally ,, Are 'nornat circumstances"
or h droloe / problematic: present? _�
SUMMARY OF FIN�INC.0
to neeaeo, explain any answers in remarks.)
=Hydrophoytication present?? Is the sampled area within a wetlan,present? f yes. optional wetland site IIT
Remarks. (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VFrFTATInra __ I Ise ....:,...er... _
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
r
T!ee Stratum
Absolute Dominan Indicator
(Plot size: &r ) Vo Cover t Species Staus
Dominance Test Worksheet
1 Q".-^
Number of Domini of Species
ou✓
., - 4 10 �L_
that are DEL, FAUN, or FAC.7
(A)
_ - _
2
3
_•__
Total Number of Dominant
4
_, -
Species Acrosu all Strata: q:
;f3)
5
—._ i`_
Percent of Doming it Species
that are DBL, FACIN. or FAC(IVB)
Total Ccver
_=
Saohno/Shrub stratum I,Plot size. lil4gd
Prevalence Index Worksheet -
2- —��
9�_ Y F;qe
Total 1, Cover of:
. Pi.,..��4- `
�•cF --16' —•N -;4ej
OBL spec as _ 0 x 1 = 0
�u5 �_ FAera
-- _.
FACN7 species _ 0 x2= 0
4 —.�_
5.
_ __ __
_
FAC species
FACU species D x4= p
Cover
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
Herb stratum
T=Total
(Plot size: Jr�.As� )
Column totals _ 0 (A) 0 •
(B)
2�(�'� "' •�:-�J
Z:.ae r� v c
Preva ence Index: = B/A =
_ ,Q
• _ I C, -_ _ FAe
Hydrephytic Vegetation Indicators:
•--�'wx rr,.0
"r"r' n.aG. Z j=
_ Rapid test for hydrophytic aegetaticr
5 _A_
_Dominance test is >50%
_
6
_ Prevalence in:fex is s3.0'
7 - _
Morphogical adaptations' (provide
supporting da a in Remarks or on a
10
—Separate sheE I)
-
=Total Cover
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
Woody vine stratum
(Plot size:
(e:xpen)
-
1
'Indicators of hydric :oil and Ymiland hydro ogly must
be
2
__
Present, uiless disturbed or probf iiintir-
Hy cop ytrc -
vegetation
-
0 =Total Cover
present? N'
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL
lmviinq romt: _t_Profile Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ----I
Depth Matrix -P,edox Features ------_-,i
(Inches) color(meist) % color(moist) 5; Type* Loc'" :
Y. _ Texture Renarks_�
° lev,.ri I
—�.
Frmary ]indicators (minimum of one is recuiredCheck a" that a•o'd Secorrlary Ine!cators (rnin.run �; btrc requireC`
Surface Water (Ai)
r—
Water Table (A2)
I
(
_'true Aquatic Plants (314) Patterns (BIC)
iydrogen Sulfide
Water Marks (Bt)
_ Odor (CI) _�_ DrairagE n tterns Babe (C2!
Oxdized Rhizospheres or Living Foots Crayfish Burrows {Ca)
'Type: C = Concentration, D = Deple€on RM = Reduced M -••-x MS - Masked Sarc Grans. '-Location: Pt. =Pore L,'n
Hyurie don muicators,
Histisol (A
A.gal R4al or Crust (B4)
rist
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sells:
e
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Sandy Greyed Matrix (S4)
Redox ($5)—Dark
Coast Prairie Redox (A<e) {LRR I<, L, R;
_Black kistic (A3)
Sulfide (A4)
_Sandy
Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Loamy
Surface iS ") (LRR K, L)
— cm SMucky face (S ; or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L. R;
S3) ,
_Hydrogen
Stratified Layers (A5)
Mucky Mineral (F1)
i_
Iron -Manganese Masses ( (LRR , R)
2 cm Muck Al 0)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Very
Very Shallow Da'k Surface (TF12)
Dep!eted Below Dark Surface (A111
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redex Dark Surface (F6)
�-(explain in remarks)
_ThiCk Dark Surface (Al 2)
Sand tauck Mineral t
Y (Sit
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7
-- )
Radex Depressions
'Intl: -calors of hyCr cphytic vegetztio^ anti e:eltarC
—Sandy
5 ern Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
_ ,F8)
hydrology must c a present, uiiess Cis^.rbed or
proclematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type.
Depth (!aches):
Hydric soli presert?
iRemarks:
—_
HYDROLOGY
--.
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
—�.
Frmary ]indicators (minimum of one is recuiredCheck a" that a•o'd Secorrlary Ine!cators (rnin.run �; btrc requireC`
Surface Water (Ai)
r—
Water Table (A2)
Aquatic Fauna B13 —Surface
( ) Surface soil Cracks (B6)
`High
Saturation (A3)
_'true Aquatic Plants (314) Patterns (BIC)
iydrogen Sulfide
Water Marks (Bt)
_ Odor (CI) _�_ DrairagE n tterns Babe (C2!
Oxdized Rhizospheres or Living Foots Crayfish Burrows {Ca)
—Sediment Deposits (82)
Drift Deposits
(C3) __ Saturation Visible on Aera; In•acien, (C9i
A.gal R4al or Crust (B4)
rist
_V Presence of Reduced Irp- (C4) __ Stunted :ir Stressed Plants iCt)
Iron Deposits (65)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils Geomorl:hic Position (D2)
—Inunoation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
iCe) FAC -Neutral Test (DS)
—'thin Muck Surface (C7) --
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (Be)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes
No (inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes
Saturation present? Yes
_r—Depth
No -X_ Depth (inches): .-2 hydrology
yd oto?
No ^eplh
p^eludes capalary fringe)
(inches);
--- ✓ —7 2— p
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, mon toying
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if avadable:
Remarks;
i;5 At Corps of Engineers
Midwest keeicn
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
FrojecVSite Q(p4. ( �, �
Applicant/Owner I / City/County. Gjg,�,fytrs __Sampl'tg Cate:��jS-
State 1�9A/ Samplitg Point:_,_
landform (hills �yg.,� 3ectior, Township, Range: ,-�-
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.)
�.a^....+ - _ Local relief (concave., convex, none) e
Slope (%): Lal: j Long
Soil Map Unit Name_' Datum
_VWI Classification:
Are ciimafic/hydrologic condlttons of the site typical for this time of the year? _ /y ;If no, explain in remarks)
Are vegetation �) , soilor h crolo
Y 9Y_AL significantly cisturbed? Are "ro ' circumstances
Are vegetation sdil , or hydrology naturally problematic? Desert?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -� present? Y
Hydrophytic vegetation presenfl (If rseeded. exp am any answers in re.' a ksHydr.;
Wellasoil present? y_ r s the sampled area within a wetlan, 1
VJetlantl hydrology present?
yes, optimal wetland site ID:
(Explain alternative procedures he'e or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
US
—
Absolute Dominan Indicatcr
Tree Stratum (Plot size: rr ) °h Cover t Species Stalls
Dorninance Test Worksheet
Number of Dcri-iant Species
2 _
that are OBL. FA -W, or FAC _'� (A)
3 __
_
Total Number of Dominact
4 -
Species Acressall Stratai?J (g,,
_
Percent of oomi )ant Species
._.�_ _ _
:hat are OBL, FACW, or FAC; j-._(A;gl
Saoh0 =TotalC,overna/Shrub stratum (Piot size: 1 Sr n )
Prevalence
t
Index Worksheet
Total % Cover c f:
:3 .___ -- _ _
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
FACVV species 0 x2= p
i
FAC species C x 3 = 0
�.
FACU species C x 4 = p
0 =Total Cover
Herb stratum (Plot size: .��NuJ )--
UPL species 0 X5= p
_
��
Column totals
.n �'
'4Y ; s: —�_ � -r�[r�
Prevalerce Inde K = B/A
- —I&_ —L —FAY
I 4�e_ Y_ -�L
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators;
5 _
_ Rapid test frr hy'rcphytic vegetation
ii _
K Dominance test is >50%
Prevalence Idex is s3.0'
g --- _
Morphogical adaptations- (p(ov,ae
H
supporting cata it Remarks or on z
t r;
_ separate shy;ep
__
___=Total Cover'
Problematic hydropnytic vsgeiation'
(explain)
Woody vine stratum (Plot size o i�,,,,J I
—
t
'Indicators of hydrin soil and wetleld hydro ogI Njst be
pfesent, u, ass distumed or probe:nal C
F y rop yt r.
0 =Total Cover V
`tion
)
r<ema:ks. (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
_
—)L --
'
US Amy Corps of Engineers
Midwest Region
SOIL
profile Description: (Describe to the depth
Depth Matrix
(Inches) I Color (moist) % Color
= Concentration, D = Depletion, Rfoi =
_ Histisol (Al)
_ Hist c Epipedon (A2)
_ Buck Hstic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Stratified Layers (A5!.
_ 2 cm Muck (A10)
Depeted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
Th:ck Dark Surface (At 2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
5 cm MUCKY Peat or Peat (S3)
Type:
Depth (inches).
Surface Water (At)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (Bt)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (83)
Algai Mat or Crust (B4)
iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (86)
Waver -Stained Leaves (89)
heeded to document the Indicator or
Loc"
MIS = Masked Sand
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fit
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions ;F6)
Sampling Point:
nee of indicators
Texture L Remarks
"Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Mat`x
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L. R.,
—Dark Surface (S') (LRR K, L(
5 cm Mucky Pea `. or Peat (S3) (LRR K, L, R)
_Iron-10anganese Masses (1712) (LRR K, L, R)
Very Shallow Da -k Surface (TF12)
Othe- (explain in remarps)
'trrtllcetors of hycr aphyfic vegetation and weltaro
hydrology must to present, untess disturbed or
Problematic
Hydric :soil present? y_
_Aquatic Fauna (1513)
_'True Agcatic Plants (B141
_Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Ct)
Oxidized Rhlzospheres on Livirg Roots
_ ICl)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent [ton Reduction in Tilled Sois
_ (Ce)
`hin IAuck Surface (C7)
Gauge c• Well Data (09)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
e water present? Yes —__L_ Ng Depth (inches):
table present? Yes �_ No Depth (inbhes): --L ._
tion present? Yes_ No Depth, (inches):
as capillary fringe) --3-I_
Surface ::;oil Cracks (136)
�^ Drainage Patterrs (ilo)
o)
Dry -Seaton Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burroars (Cb)
Saturation Visible onAena:Imagery(C9)
_ Stunted cr Stressed Plants (D7)
Geomont hic Position (D2)
FAC-Ne::ral +est ;D5)
Wet and
hydrology
present?
Describe recorded data (st--ream gauge, monitoring we I, aerial photos, previous inspections 1, if e:vailabie:
US Army Corps of Engineers
M doves: Region
APPENDIX C
Site Photographs
APPENDIX D
Wetland Delineation Approval Forms
Project N;4me and/or Number:
PART ONE: Applicant Information 2w5--23¢
If applicant is an entity (company, government entity, partnership, etc), an authorized contact person must be identified. If the
a;)plicant is using an agent (consultant, lawyer, or other third party) and has authorized them to act on their behalf, the agent's
contact information must also be provided.
Applicant/Landowner Name:,;�
Mailing Address: ips P Mem-T: f
Phone:
E-mail Address: -1(p„ V.p �y� f ��
16A J
Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above): 57AA
Mailing Address;
Phone:
E-mail Address:
Agent Name:
Mailing Address; W.17rim cab STA WDGJ PSSJ '�sa.l�Jwt �11Vlrsp,yY7„�.{�)
Phone:
E-mail Address: %N 1 i'�N �j✓r'¢�
,JGYGo�pigr�vi�/6ZfM3jq, Gp�,t
PART TWO: Site Location Information
County: CA, -.l City/Township:
Parcel ID and/or Address:
Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): See.14N R2.3ti1
Lat/Long (decimal degrees): J J
Attach a map showing the location of the site in relation to local streets, roads, highways.
Approximate size of site (acres) or if a linear project, length (feet):
If you know that your proposal will require an individual Permit from the U.S. Arany Corps of Engineers, you must provide';he
na nes and addresses of all property owners adjacent to the project site. This information may be provided by attach ing a list to
your application or by using block 25 of the Application for Department of the Army permit which can be obtained at:
http:i/www mvo usace army mil/Portals/57/docs re l or Re Uat rrLDoc.;/en form 4245 20i2oct•ogf
PART THREE: General Project/Site Information
If t1is application is related to a delineatior approval, exemption determination, jurisdictional determination, or other
correspondence submitted prior to this application then describe that here and provice the Corps of Engineers project number,
Describe the project that is being proposed, the project purpose and need, and schedule for implementation and comp:exon. The
project description must fully describe the nature and scope of the proposed activity including a description cf all project elements
that effect aquatic resources (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) and must also include plans and cross section or profile dra,virgs
showing the location, character, and dimensions of all proposed activities and aquatic resource impacts.
Minnesota Interagency water Resource Application Form February 2014
Project N,:me and/or Number:
PART FOUR: Aquatic Resource Impact' Summary 2tq�s-7-g�,
If your proposed project involves a direct or indirect impact to an aquatic resource (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) identify each
impact in the table below. Include all anticipated impacts, including those expected to be temporary. Attach an overnead view
IT ap, aerial photo, and/or drawing showing all of the aquatic resources in the p-oject area and the locations) of the proposed
impacts. Label each aquatic resource on the map with a reference number or letter and identify the impacts in the following table.
(Aquatic Resource
Aquatic
I ype or impacti
(fill, excavate,
Duration of I —
Impact ExistingPlant
^County, Major
ID (as noted on
1 Resource Type
i (wetland, lake,
drain, or
Overall Size of
Permanent (P) I Size of Impact"l Aquatic Community
Watershed p,
overhead view)
i tributary etc.'
remove
I vegetation)
I or Temporary - Resource' Types) ir.
a
I (7)= � Impact Area
and Bank -
Service Area p
-�—
-
—}----�___
of Impact Area'.
If impacts are temporary; enter the duration of the impacts in days next to the "T". For example, a project witit a temporary access °ill that
would be removed after 220 days would be entered 'T (22GJ".
It less than 0.01 acre should be reported in square feet. Impacts 0.01 acre cr greater should be reported as acres and rounded to the
nearest 0.01 acre. Tributary impacts must be reported in linear feet of impact and an area of impact by indicating first the linear feet of imoact
along the flowline of the stream followed by the area impact in parentheses). For example, a project that impa::ts 53 feet of a stream that is E
feet wide would be reported as 50 it (300 square feet).
3This is general y only applicable if you are applying for a de minimis exemption under MA Rules 8420.0420 Supp. 8, otherwise ente• "y/A".
4Lse Werlond Plants and Plont Community Types of Minnesota and Wisconsin 3'd Ed. as modified in MN Rules 8420.0405 Subp, 2.
5Refer to Major Watershed and Bank Service Area maps in MN Rules 8420.0522 Subp. 7.
If any of the above identified impacts have already occurred, identify which impacts they are and the circumstances assocnated
with each:
PART FIVE: Applicant Signature
E. Check here if you are requesting a pre-aoolication consultation with the Corps and LGU based or the information you have
provided. Regulatory entities will not initiate a formal application review if this box is checked.
By signature below, I attest that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I furthrr attest that I possess the
authority to undertake the work described herein.
Signature: _—
Date:
I hereby authorize to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information in support of this application.
3 The term impZpas1f2c this joint application form is a generic term used for disclosure purposes to identify
activities that may require approval from one or more regulatory agencies. For purposes of this form it is not meant to
indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement.
Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014
...._.___ ....._... Page 4 of 11
Project Name and/or Number:
Attachment A��� -z31
Request for Delineation Review, Wetland Type Determination, or
Jurisdictional Determination
By submission of the enclosed wetland delineation report, I am requesting that: the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St, Paul Distr,ct
(Corps) and/or the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (LGU; provide me with the following (check all that apply):
Wetland Type confirmation
1.4 Delineation concurrence. Concurrence with a celineation is a written notification from the Corps and a decision from the t.GJ
concurring, not concurring, or commenting on the boundaries of the aquatic resources delineated on the property. De'inaation
concurrences are generally valid for five years unless; site conditions change. Under this request alone, the Corps will not address
the jurisdictional status of the aquatic resources on the property, only the boundaries of the resources within the review area
(including wetlands, tributaries, lakes, etc.).
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination, A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) is a non-binding written indicaticn
fr).m the Corps that waters, including wetands, idertified on a parcel may be waters of the United States. For pu.-poses of
computation of impacts and compensatory mitigation requirements, a permit decision made on the basis of a FJD will teat all
waters and wetlands in the review area as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. PJos are advisory in nature arc maq not be
appealed.
u Approved Jurisdictional Determination. An approved jurisdictional determination (AJD) is an off cial Corps determination that
jurisdictional waters of the United States are either present or absent on the property. AJDs can generally be relied apon by the
affected party for five years. An AID may be appealed through the Corps administrative aapeal process.
In order for the Corps and LGU to process your request, the wetland delineation must be prepared ir accordance wi;ii the 187
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, any approved Regional Supplements to the 1987 fvianual, and the Guideiines9
;or
St,bmitting Wetland Delineations in Minnesota (2013).
h;t1r//www mvo usace army mil rMissions/Regi latoiy/DelineationJDGuidance asMi
M..nnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014
Page 5 of 11
APPENDIX G
Transaction Form for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits
Transaction Form for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits
from the Minnesota Wetland Bank
tt the layout of this form looks incorrect, click on Viet, Edit Docume
1. Credit User
To be completed by the person or entity proposing to use the wetland credits.
Name: David Vogel
Organization (if applicable):
Street Address: 105 Pioneer Trail
City, State, Zip: Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: 612-991-2848 E -Mail Address*: dpvogel@gmail.com
2. Wetland Impact Information
ht, then save to your computer.
This space is for BWSR use only.
Debit Date:
To be completed for the project with wetland impacts that this withdrawal is intended to replace.
Project Name: Vogel Driveway Permit
County of Impact: Carver
Impact Major Watershed #: 33
Impact Bank Service Area: 9
**Sec. 25 Twp. 116 Rge. 23
Wetland Impact Size (acres): 0.0220
Replacement Ratio: 2:1
Total Replacement Required (acres): 0.0440
U.S. Army Corps Permit # (if applicable):
LGU File # (if applicable):
"Projects with multiple impact locations should use the most central location in relation to the project as a whole.
Comments:
By signature below, the proposed user of credits attests that he/she owns or has purchased the credits identified in this
application and has received approval from the applicable regulatory authority(ies).
Credit User Signature:
Date:
3. Regulatory Approval/Authorization
By signature below, the identified agency and authorized representative hereby certify that they have: a) verified that the subject
wetland credits are deposited in the account of the owner/seller, b) approved a wetland replacement plan or similar agreement under their
jurisdiction, and c) approve the proposed use of the wetland bank credits described herein.
WCA LGU/Agency: City of Chanhassen E-mail address*: tjeffrey@ci.chanhassen.mn.us
LGU Representative: Terry Jeffrey Signature: Date:
(for NRCS, USACE, etc. if applicable)
Agency Name/Location: USACE
Representative: Melissa Jenny
E-mail address*: melissa.m.jenny@usace.army.mil
Signature:
Date:
`Confirmation will be e-mailed to user, seller, and regulatory representative when the transaction is complete. If you would like others notified,
enter e-mail addresses here.
jacobsonenv@msn.com natasha.devoelQgate.mn.us
Rev 3/16/2015 Transaction Form for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Pape 1 of 2
C:\Users\Owner\oomments\2015 info\2015.215 Vogel 96a1 Meadowlark Driveway Permit\Appendix G transaction form (or_wtl of—cred ls.dacx
Transaction Form for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits
µ from the Minnesota Wetland Bank
4. Withdrawal Information
Bank Service Area: 9
To be completed by seller of credits (account holder).
Account Number: 1392 County: 10
Credit
Subgroup
Federally
Authorized Plant Community Type
Number of Credits to be
Cost per Credit Withdrawn (acre)
Cost: of Purchased
Credits
Letter
Credits (Y or N)
(acre)
(acre=ft2/43560)
(cost per credit x number of
B
Y SM
$40510.80 0.0440
$1782.48
_
so.0o
TOTAL
0.0440
$1782.48
If TOTAL does not calculate, right click, Update Field
Table Enter County Fee from
www.tywsr.state.mn.us/wetiandsJwetlandbanking/fee and sales dataM'etland Bank Fee Schedule odf Table (county of sellers
bank)
6.5/'o of sale price
— ---------------
Above TOTAL x County
Transaction Fee (choose either amount) Fee $ 115.86
$ 0.00
Attach check payable to Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources.
By signature below I seller and holder of the aforementioned account in the State of Minnesota Wetland Mitigation Bank certify that:
1) The credits described in this application have been sold to the credit user or will be used for my own project;
2) 1 have received payment in full from the buyer (if applicable);
3) The credits described in this application have not been sold or used in any way to mitigate wetland losses other than for the project
and location identified in the wetland impact information block on the previous page;
4) The credits described in this application should be withdrawn from my account; and
5) 1 will not have a negative balance of credits after the subject credits are debited from my account
Seller Name (print): Elroy Knauer
Seller Signature:
Seller e-mail":
Date:
1. The account holder of the credits is responsible for submittal of this form, containing signatures, to the BWSR Wetland
Bank Administrator so the affected account can be properly debited.
2. No impacts to any wetland or other water resource may commence until the credits have been debited and a copy of
this form, with stamped debit date, has been received by the regulatory authority(ies), the account holder, and the credit
user.
3. This form is not an application form. It is a transaction form to be used in association with an approved project that
impacts wetlands and requires wetland replacement.
When this form is completed and all required signatures are obtained, send with the fee check(s) to:
Wetland Bank Administration
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
520 Lafayette Road North
Saint Paul, MN 55155
Disclaimer., any transaction in the wetland banking system is public information.
Rev 3/16/2015 Transaction Form for Withdrawal of Wetland Credits Page 2 of 2
C:\Users\Owner\Documents\20151 nfo\3015275 Vol 19641 Meadowlark Driveway Perinavoi endix G transaction form for wd of cred its.docx
%
f
rA
to 0
as
0
d)^
00
u
„
§
\
\
\/
{
0
!
y
—
§47
<
2mm
=
\)
—
)0
to
to
CD/
2
\
§
/
§
)
§
)
/
\
§
(
—
._-
-
;!kK
2
=E2
-
.
—
«
)
7■]r
00
}§{§I
}§{§/
[
\
}
}
(
\
\
(
\
\
\
)
\
\
«
_
0
0
LLI
<
m
—
cl
ƒ
.
\
�{
16—
_*
§O [
_§
{
Io
;o
!§
§I
00
§
co
a
j
!
to
to
Ll
{
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF CARVER )
I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes that she is and was on
January 21, 2016, the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chanhassen,
Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed a copy of the attached notice of Public
Hearing for 9641 Meadowlark Lane Variance and Wetland Alteration Permit — Planning
Case 2016-04 to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A", by enclosing a copy of said notice
in an envelope addressed to such owner, and depositing the envelopes addressed to all such
owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses
of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver
County, Minnesota, and by other appropriate records.
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this day ofUa nLta v, ,2015.
'T
Notary Jblic
u
Kar e . En lh dt, Depty Clerk
KIM T. MEUWISSEN
�,, Notary Public Minnesota
0,;-r; p,7y Conpn1W . evi! Jen 37,2020
rq
G
C1 O
r.-
' y
L
M ££C
G
V p
a'C
O r
C
d �
�a
Od
N
N
R
s
C
S
r
G
d O d
.. y N d
o
d
y.°ca w
N o o @� L d d
v
rWos°
c
C
0-0 CO 7
d C C C O~ aL. .'
c
o'cCi$ €a P o f«c
E
N
U W
.@.
N d O d U C C 0
O)
_
rv2`v' El t
`.6 o.oEi
E
o,�
@
a
.0
@ O)= d
@ O C L E C O O
d a
@
x.yv 8- - 2-c
=D
cr
m'4) 3 o a
r E@ N d o
O' N
ao
meg;,
„w._ �mW ._=vwwW�
aE 'mEms_
c
@ d
O C: a d C
>`d@
Mn d O> C'C
��U@E- Q
C
r 33E E,v
wg�
N>
aYa
N O`
E -C L d O N
O
C ,' d' O C C E O T
y0
d
mmci m�w.2a ocwo
' v=yE-cw�oc v>Ev�
y
r °)LOQ
Q
N
U N aU'
O N O @
d'O
Ey
v= °jOFc'�Ec am°vc We
EE
r£
N
C
d 0
Y
E d O d' E
C aa�.o E
d T U C U
@ L y
c N
`wcc c W
=.ov"o v._t - - - E
E N
c
-0�
O a 0
E 3 E lO
L
3 `0 o= m E a L t..
002@3
N
C
N
p C
d O L
oUcE o�F
N3
dd5
O c
C,
d>
�«yactMdNYd
�i
O) C N C= , L-.
d O d N Lj a N@ d
C N
cum�co�n Et= E
O �0
O
O'
O m
C r- N
cE3oaEa
N N L
°..o@@-p°'a"c'-'�
O
Eam
s
IhchL�
O
I�
N
-o
@D
@'c6 O OL C
N N L$ d 0- d
@
c`c Encoodv' vo
O
f-N•_l0@
a)
N
d 3 `�@
-0@ aC -COO>++0d
_U d
aa° od oUa_m �9 ov °.
-
(09
�w
z@
`�
�yL
OL..��N dd
N0)7 LNOd3L d�=L.+"
o O
�u,�
=�„:ELeW��
O m
� w
d
Y
O O)d d> N
c@ C d V 0 a @ E
o o
o n< < l m t EE'z'°D -65
NNEOCU
E
0 V
d C.`
a)w
-0.0 ”'>ad0
'a CL Ut d>yacC.00
X
cvo n3 mg N��w ow._o
N
N
d p .E-.
c J
O c O t o U U
O- O) d
a O p o .= d O
d C 0- "'
d.
a? N
' a E c Yi n h
`
t
U.
C J N_
�O O
@ T L
J d ..
@ Q C- y
y O@ 3 d
7 U Q
3 w N O d- H- H
a
@ O
N `° o° W n
N - - S, c- n E .;.505
c
'd
@'
Y N C
Y y O a) O)
d V c@
d..y. y w. T C -L
3 •• d
O O
.
3m �ncov .-Om 8i: =o
7
>
'(U
m
�
LL O
@ N
L.. > C
O Q U
d U@ w O E
N L 3 w
a Q)
C J
¢aEa aa`Eva ova AN dzt
-0
C>
�'
Cc c
>i�
v (0
2000'-c d U
d d E
Op C 00M>@wy
@N�r.
w$t mE58Eavy�3'^f+°°
LLyp
O
`p d.�dOYq
d
a U
N�-a.L-QdL�
Q
@dY�@(�t'M0
QL @ dU.�
@ O
FL `,°-naa Ea.ywE uoi load°
U
.O
0ON
O
E
0 y @ 3 O O
N @ E
C mit
y V 0 3 O)
N C
- aa
(n � n v 5
>.�-N
@d
@
�>
0@
>
_O c
d O]
ate, d
C '.k
w L 0
f0 d O CL
3 >''U N C
E
d N
a E a'v' E E
8- Tm�.t
n o w_
-@0
N Cr
;a
_ f� m
7@ @ r M d
Q U
p t0 m V
j
o o
0 0 `o m o 5 o v c
N m=
0-N �'0
d=
f�
j .2!/JH U d I
d Q d
O U d N N O. N� � C>�
E
c
E`m� d�awn'c-enc mpp, v
yo
=y...
c
d
@
V p O
(Ov-L
O
Qa 7
Td N d 16 O R
O >.LO N r �.
E
�a
og�ES W o
3 = n�oEo
F-OUO'QK0O)
U
CC Q CC
O
QF
@ @ Q,NMt
'-L. NLO)L E N G.a
C c
°s2 mbn�
Co N
�� aE� do?EnO'`t Ev E c
CN aLy°
nE
0
d
CQjLC9c
d._
a 7L
Oav`aa civ='a°�°u
m°v�v
E
° m
CL
06
yw
CC=aw
c' @ssv�w=d�
vnt_m
Ivo o'dwns"
�-
C
cc
TC
M d
C C
�E Vay'w
_m�'n ENL5 nw �w `v mtm
O
0
A
!�
0
O
= ^2
E
Fn
62
d
a
COL6
am
d
ti
a)
-2T-El'tis-61.— am
¢n
c
0
a
p o
7 0
W O
Ea.s 9>c�°S `ocv`w'wm
O=w s.na.E�'T-
O
J
0.
Q
IL -i
R
CSU
z a;U
wr n'
r
"m'
a
c
d O d
N
-L-.s
o
d
� 0L.. N
.y O 0
d d
N
e wOmEo om wNav
c
d
3 �0 @ N
> Y d d..N. O F' aL.
c
>.n ova EE
E
NC
O
L N U
aLn
N @ aci co aci cdi c
0)
ocSd mE§ma E E °m t
N
@ 0) N N
co O U Q E C O O `
@
rcNm m ootiE v�
M
ca
a
cr
�'� 3 v
E
Q r E @.y d o
0
mo
Cw� €�.»dam _
Elm_
c
d
@
Y
O C. 0 C
T CO CL a)
N d 0 a C'C
.O U Q
E
C
0
aOET
of L,
w o� q�o"--v_ma
t
'0
>
U O
d L Q
E.L.. a 0 N
0 >i O @ C
C O e C E T
a) 0
d
mo .0 .2
ae EES°c->yo
t$L0�0-
uOEd
ya N
LC 0
d p N.-1 Od0
Ed
om v
o`-- EnrEcWmUac_=r
~ gyp
N
y c0
'�
E 0 vj O d V E
d T m ?" C U 9 y
G "y
`w 2' o
c0
y a Q� L E
d0 =O
E w. C 3 d d
CE. E�N�
d L
Ld
... ....
aco._G �., w o
3_,`_ foo%woN§Loydw
.O
o
@
c �0
N
> m O- C aU
O
O X10 L
U c E@
3 3
mum Va E a °_>•o=M
arnw Gmc
Sg
O d
@
Nd
�O
y ar d
C 0)d y=d
C
o o >I-
ddd Q' -Rd
d f0 7
yN
w;@o
Baa '�0'F =rvoS".aEc=.E
O �0
0
n>
0
0„
0._ Y c Y
C 3w @ Ea
y d N Y
o_ @ Na d d
@
O
Eaw o i m_ c" v c=_3 °N
-w :°ted: a'odc._
ch
La
a -o
E O
O QOc
'� ..p d O Qa C
d N L d d
_
U
- - E v o 8' moa
-ma 25=.`vm
O
f-N•_l0@
Co@
N
d
L @-a a C
Q)L_. 0- > r
_U d
u=yam
T�v ca°woa
(O��L„U�
�dL
u
Or.�Nda-O
d d
CC
N07 LNOd•3pdr,
c@ 0
o O
_v$w=--EEc Em'oi
o n v wn E c
O m
� w
d
Y
0 O C)2 N d
C- d>
C d V a w E
>'> E
o
o n e
N�
E
0 V
d C.`
d Co `.0
d 0
tea' L > `ad
a E'p UL
L U 0 O«� C
`O_
Xa
cvo n3 mg N��w ow._o
N D@UO
0
CJ
C7 p UV
0
d d C O d0
`a �''
d-
awycvoa5�n„dti5
:e
-L
C 0
@
CU
J d
cc =_ d
Mn O C' yL..
3
O U
3 d N p _ tl) y N
.,d.a
@ 0
E- %gc Ec �,n=GS
Z`cU.
OO
c
W O @
� 0)
d„N_, yyj«' Tc -M X
3• 'Ev
0 0+-'
<<a
64a _En °Ee`�P't E5°'o
>
U>
c
m
�
K o
@ .. N'�
d �y d c @
O d >@
O 0.2-0) `m
d U 1p Ew o
N d L 7 � E
0ci d@
nd
C 3 E
mvatE9ww>m n`w
W E.. '-v-E ......
a d
J
@ c
d
3�
d �
E c m- U
o y
O' C 0 > w 0
p
(a d
c o=
con
wEZ =ov E.,.E
d d
LL
O
d
`p LL
d
O Y m
a U
d _
°. C d d
N a d L-
@ -O @ .O
V% U'
O- d
@ O
v
E ° v mL=
o o'an y .-M, nE
.'0
< v
U
.O
0ON
O
E
Nm0
0 y @ Q O
aC:E @EUc.@AUC-�00)2L
C 0@ .0 p
(0
EON
__ _$- n m' -env
>.�-N
@d
�>
O@ d E9
3 N d
d d
-E.='EaE�C-E.
moo
N m=
d
7@
N>
;a
_ f� m
@ d
a U? U L O O L
V O N C U'C
O U d E N w' d
7
d ;d
vvh mcioa o�v�E�Sagi `o
E _ n w
d.-
QY
V D O
d Q O L fn H U d...
E d N a N N O@>>
OCL
C
w
oYi= n�nEEfr °Eq�e ca
-0 D.
d
8 L
s a
U
CC Q CC
O
O) �"J-. Q
F @@ Q � N M V
ri w ton 0) E N 6 4
C C
N CO h
U
o`v $`-. cS.Pyc`mv t n8oi�
0
C C
a 7L
�8c' m 8vs"fav°mot@s
E
d
GHJ
3C_Cdcs
C
�S m�E9SUN wu yo,c nt
Si'=v o nOV
~
p
N
E L
P n.cS
waw -------
Em
O
N
p006
A
!�
0
O
= ^2
O d
COL6
coo
cL
.�roEon�Ec
c
0
CL
)
a 4 Xo<Emmd
IL -j
o
c ci
z a
�
y�$._
ANN M WILLIAMSON SUSU ADRIAENS NEIL A KLINGELHUTZ
240 EASTWOOD CT 241 EASTWOOD CT 9731 MEADOWLARK LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8683 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8683 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8626
MICHAEL D WISTRAND
9670 MEADOWLARK LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8694
STEVEN F & KATHLEEN M BURKE
9591 MEADOWLARK LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8693
WILLIAM T & CAROL ANN GRAY
50 PIONEER TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8627
TIMOTHY A & DAWNE M ERHART
9611 MEADOWLARK LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8695
CHARLENE M SCHUBERT
9610 MEADOWLARK LN
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8694
GAYLE M & RICHARD P VOGEL
105 PIONEER TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8660
MICHAEL T MONK MICHAEL J REILLY DONALD H III & DIANE M KENNEDY
9671 MEADOWLARK LN 9701 MEADOWLARK LN 108 PIONEER TRL
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8695 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8626 CHANHASSEN, MN 55317-8659