Wetland Delination ReportWETLAND DELINEATION
REPORT
10t1 1 t2021
2021-366
1,441 Lake Lucy Rd Delineation
Chanhassen, M N
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC
jacobson env@msn.com
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC
Environmental Consulta nts
www,jacobsonenvi ron mental.com
Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Email: iacobsonenv@msn.com
(612) 802-6619 Cell
Ta ble of Contenrs
2.1 EX|ST|NG TNFORMATTON REVTEW ..........................3
2.L.L Antecedent Precipitation ..............3
2.1.2 NationalWetlands Inventory ..........................3
2.1.3 Web Soil Survey. ...........................3
2.1.4 Public Waters Inventory... .............3
2.1.5 Topographic Map........... ...............3
2.2 FIELD DE1|NEATION................. ............4
2.2.1Vegetation............ .........................4
2.2.2 Hydric Soils ........... .........................5
2.2.3 Cautions Used in Applying the Field Indicators of Hydric soi|s........... ......................5
3.1 WETLAND BASTN DESCR|PT|ONS............... ..............6
4.0 CONFIRMATION OF JURISDICTIONAL STATUS ..,..,.....7
Appendices
Appendix A Antecedent Precipitation Data
Appendix B Sample Data Sheets
Appendix C Site Photographs
Appendix D Wetland Type and Boundary Approval Forms
Figu res
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 National Wetland Inventory Map
Figure 3 Soils Map
Figure 4 Public Waters Inventory Map
Figure 5 Delineation Map
Figure 6 Topographic Map
Figure 7 Hydric Rating Map
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys
Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW's-Soil ID-Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environmental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking-Tree Surveys-Natural Resource Manaqement plans
Jacobson Flnvironmental, PI,LC
Environmental Consulta nts
www.jacobsonenvi ron menta l.com
Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Email: iacobsonenv@msn.com
1.0 SU M MARY
(612) 802-6619 Cell
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC (JE)visited the project site at 1441 Lake Lucy Rd, Chanhassen,
Minnesota 55317 on 10/08/2021.The sitewas approximately 4.9 acres in size, and was located at
Section 2,T116N, R23W, Chanhassen, Minnesota See Figure l for a Site Location Map.
The purpose of the investigation was to identify areas withrn the project boundary meeting the technrcal
criteria for wetlands, delineate the jurisdictional extent of the wetland basins, and classifylhe weland
habitat according to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manuat and the 20,10
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation: Midwest Region
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 for life in hydric soilconditions. Examples of wetlands include seasonally
flooded basins, floodplain forests, wet meadows, shallow and deep marshes, shrub swamos. wooded
swamps, fens, and bogs.
Wetland boundaries were determined through a routine analysis of the vegetation, soils and hydrology
which must all show wetland characteristics for an area to be delineated as a wefland.
Two baslns were delineated within the project area, which is summarized below and shown on Fiqure 5
Cowardin
Type 2 PEM,1B
Type 3 PEMl C
Eggers & Reed
Wet Meadow
Shallow Marsh
Dominant Vegetation
Nodding Beggartick, Reed
Canary Grass, Lake Sedge,
and Green Ash
Lake Sedge, Duckweed.
and Narrow Leaf Cattail
Size
Fgtqs)
266
zzz
All figures and appendices referenced by this report are presented at the end of the text
This wetland delineation was performed by Jacobson Environmental, PLLC under the direction of Wayne
Jacobson, Minnesota Professional Soil Scientist #3061 '1, Society of Wetland Scientists - professionai
Wetland Scienttst #1000, University of Minnesota / BWSR Wetland Delineator, Certified #i0ig. American
Fisheries Society - Associate Fisheries Scientist #A-j71.
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys 2
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 Environmentalo PLLC
Environmental Consulta nts
www.jacobsonenvi ron menta l.com
Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Email: iacobsonenv@msn.com
2.0 METHODS
(612) 802-6619 Cell
2 1 EXISI ING INFORMA'I ION REVIEW
Prior to field delineation, Jacobson Environmental reviewed the followinq information:
2.1.1 Antecedent Precipitation
The previous three month's precipitation data obtarned from the Minnesota State Climatology Office
suggest that the sampling period occurred under normal conditions. Antecedent precipitation data can be
found in Appendix A. The growing season in this area is approximately from mid-April to mid-October,
when the air temperature averages above 28 degrees F. This delineation was completed during the
growing season.
2..1.2 National Wetlands lnventory
The National Wetlands lnventory (NWl) identified two (PABH and PFOlA) wefland comptexes within the
property boundary (Figure 2)
2.1.3 Web SoilSurvey
The National Resource Conservation Service Web Soil Survey (Figure 7) identified the following soils
seU Hy9!1r_c_&a!ilg_
C qtQp_Vg We-bs,te r _Co m p |ex 100
_E$pxULle JendJ Lqqm
Kr_1kgryry leqter Loams
Lester-Kilkeny Corrlglex
-4lqq.l"rqq-@l---
2.1.4 Public Waters Inventory
The Mtnnesota Department of Natural Resources Public Waters Inventory shows that one public water
exists on the property (Figure 4).
2.1.5 Topographic Map
A topographic map with aerial photo overlay was obtained from Carver County (Figure 6). This map was
reviewed for suspected wetland areas based on topography and vegetative cover.
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monrtoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys
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
100 _
0
100
I
I
I
I
l
Jacobson Environmental, PLI,C
Environmental Consultants
www.jacobsonenvi ron menta l.com
Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Email: iacobsonenv@msn.com
(612) 802-6619 Cell
2.2 t-ttt_D DEL tN EATtoN
The wetlands on the subject property were delineated using the routine determination methodology set
forth in the 1987 U S. Army Corps of EngineersWetlands Delineation Manualand the 2010 Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation: Midwest Region as follows.
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
Soil pits were dug using a Dutch augerto depths of '18'-40", noting soil profites and any
hydric soil characteristics
Signs of wetland hydrology were noted and were compared to field criteria such as deptn
to shallow water table and depth of soil saturation found in the soil oits.
Transects were established in representative areas of each wetland. Each transect consisted of one
sample potnt within the wetland and one sample point in upland. Other areas which have one or more of
the wetland vegetation, soils, or hydrologic characteristics present, or where questionable conditions exist
may also have been sampled. Data sheets for each sample point are available in Appendix B.
Wetland classifications discussed rn the text are set forth in Wettands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United Sfafes (FWS/OBS Publication 79131, Cowardin et al 1979) and Wetlands of the united Stafes
(USFWS Circular 39, Shaw and Fredine, 1971.) Additionally, plant community types as named by Eggers
and Reed (1998) are given.
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
Sample points are marked with orange numbered pin flags.
Any wetlands or sample points were mapped using GpS.
2.2.1Vegetation
The plant species within the parcel were catalogecl and assigned a wetland indicator status according to
Lichvar, R.W. D.L. Banks, W N Kirchner, and N.C Melvin, 2016. The NationatWettand Plant List 2016
Wetland Ratings, Phytoneuron 2016-30. i-i7.
ln the text of this report and on the enclosed data forms, the plant rndicator status follows the olant'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, and
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & 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
2)
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC
Environmental Consultants
www.jacobsonenvi ron mental.com
Wayne Jacobson, P.S.S., W.D.C., P.W.S., A.F.S.
5821 Humboldt Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Email: iacobsonenv@msn.com
(612) 802-6619 Cell
woody vine)were assigned an obligate (OBL)1, facultative wet (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC)weiland
With the 50/20 rule, dominants are generally measured by absolute ohcover in each stratum which
individually or collectively account for more than 50% of total vegetative cover in the stratum, plus any
other species which ttself accounts for at least 2O7o of the total veqetative cover.
2.2.2 l-lydric Soils
A hydric soil is a soil formed under condrtions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the
growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. lf a soil exhibits the indicators oia
hydric soil or is identified as a hydric soil the 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 colors, textures, and presence or absence
of redoximorphic indicators (i.e., mottles, gley or oxidized rhizospheres). Hydric Soil lndicators for the
Midwest Region were noted as presented in the NatronalTechnical Committee for Hydric Soils Field
lndicators of Hydric So/s ln the United Stafes version S.7 (USDA NRCS 2017) tf present at each sample
point. Upper soil profiles were also compared to the mapped or inclusionary soil series found in the
sample area for soil identification purposes
2.2.3 Cautions Used in Applying the Field Indicators of Hydric 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 pH; soils high or low jn content of organic matter; recently
developed hydric soils, and soils high in iron inputs. In some cases, we do not currenily have indicators to
assist in the identification of hydric soils in these situations. lf the soil meets the definition of a hydric soil
the lack of an indicator does not preclude the soilfrom being hydric. The indicators were developed
mostly to identify the boundary of hydric soil areas and generally work best on the margins Not all the
obviously wetter hydric soils wrll be identified by the indicators Redoximorphic features are most likely to
occur in soils that cycle between anaerobic (reduced) and aerobic (oxidized) condrtions.
Morphological features of hydric soils indicate that saturation and anaerobic conditions have existed
under either contemporary or former hydrologic regimes. Where soil morphology seems inconsistent with
the landscape, vegetation, or observable 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, when investigating hydric soils in this area, one must consider the followinq:
. Many of these soils have black or gray parent materials.
r OBl=Obligate Wetland, occurs an estimated 99% in wetlands. FACW=Facultative Weiland, has an esttmated 67"h-gg"/"
probability of occurrence in wetlands. FAC=Facultative, is equally likely to occur in wetlands and non-we|ands, 34%-66%probability FACU=Facultative Upland, occurs in wetlands only occasionally,1ok-23% probability UPL=Upland, almost never
occurs in wetlands, <1% probability Nl= No Indicator, insufficiernt information available to determine an indicator status. positive ornegative sign previously indicated a frequency toward higher (+) or lower (-) frequency of occurrence within a category
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys
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.jacobsonenvironmentar.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: iacobsonenv@msn.com
. Many of the soils have a high organic matter content.. The hydric soil margin is typically higher than the wetland boundary margin on the siter Not all the obviously wetter soils will be identified by the indicators.. Many of the hydric soils are Mollisols which are classic problem hydric soils in many cases
3 O RESULTS
3.1 WEI LAND BASIN DESCRIPTIONS
Basin 1
Basin 1 was an approximately 0.266 acres, Type2, PEMIB, Wet Meadow wetland. The basin was
dominated by Nodding Beggarticks, Reed canary Grass, Lake sedge, and Green Ash
Hydrology indicators included A2 (High Water Tabte) and A3 (Saturation).
Wetland soils met indicators A10 (2 cm Muck).
Adjacent upland was typically dominated by Common Buckthorn, Basswood, and Pennsylvania Sedge.
Primary hydrology indicators were not observed at the upland sample point, and no hydric soil indicators
were found in the upland sample point soil.
The wetland boundary followed a change in vegetation from wetland to upland plant communities, as well
as a distinct change in topography. The basin was shown as a PFOlA wetland on the NWI map (Figure
2)and was located within an area mapped as Cordova-Webstercomplex (Hydric Rating='100) by the Web
Soil Survey (Figure 7)
sample data sheets 1-Up and 1_wet in Appendix B correspond to this basin.
Basin 2
Basin 2 was an approximately 2.22 acres, Type 3, PEMlC, Shallow Marsh wetland. The basin was
dominated by Lake Sedge, Duckweed, and Narrow Leaf Cattail.
Hydrology indicators included Al (Surface Water) A2 (High Water Table), and A3 (Saturation).
Wetland soils met indicators A10 (2 cm Muck)
Adjacent upland was typically dominated by Common Buckthorn, Pennsylvania Sedge, and Basswood
Primary hydrology indrcators were not observed at the upland sample point, and no hydric soil indicators
were found in the upland sample point soil.
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys 6
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
,Iacobson Ilnvironmental, PI,LC 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 CellEmail: iacobsonenv@msn.com
The wetland boundary followed a change in vegetation from wetland to upland plant communities, as well
as a distinct change in topography. The basin was shown as a PABH wetland on the NWI map (Figure 2)
and was located within an area mapped as Klossnerand Muskego soils (Hydric Rating=100) by tfre WeO
Soil Survey (Figure 7)
Sample data sheets 2_Up and 2_wet in Appendix B correspond to this basin.
4.0 CONFIRMATION OF JURISDICTIONAL STATUS
Jacobson Environmental is submitting this report to the client and regulatory agencies to request a
wetland boundary and type determination. We have enclosed an offi-ial WCA Approval of We|and Type
and Boundary form in Appendix D along with a USCOE wetland delineation concurrence reouest
5.O CE RTI F ICATIO N
I certify that this wetland delineation meets the standards and criteria described in the '1987 U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the 20'10 Regional Supplement to the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation: Midwest Region. This was a Routine On-Site Determination and the
results reflect the conditions present at the time of the delineation.
I certify that this report has been prepared in accordance with regulatory standards Thank you for the
opportunity to provide wetland services on this important projecti
lf any wetland impacts are planned for this project, permits would be necessarv from the LGU and other
agencies.
Sincerely,
.//;,,/,,,,/,,,, /:,,,,
Wayne Jacobson, WDC, PSS
Wetland Delineator, Certified #1019
Professional Soil Scientist #3001 1
Jacobson Environmental, PLLC.
Wetland Delineation-Mitigation-Permitting-Monitoring-Banking-Functional Analysis-T & E Surveys 7Phase I Environmental Assessments-EAW's-Soil ID-Soil Analysis & Delineation-Environmental Referrals
Pond & Lake Weed Control & Fish Stocking-Tree Surveys-Natural Resource Management plans
Figures
(-,
c)
O
C.)
$-r
b0
ft
,g
6 i >n;
L6=:
- >.i L u
>oYi\h-9 b 3 a
J F= sFPCvUnQ,^ o a;-i;0*:6nr Y-uF.=oJU6
LO@-
=d.PP,2q,?:i!i
Z = X n=
-'90!v-€g s r a
:EE:-Aqi=Fs
fiuFod Y:ori-t! g.:tsb!6F EFepio- F db e=s do=6td'fi.sxeE: ;'9 ! P;: E P Etr g
I e=k,gP'- ee E * go-Poq;o
E.ciXiFd f PEEg
.E
N
Ln
b*u
I I-' !1[lL$ ss
H t,q *E!LS gdEi
r,t* uI:=94:f
!-o;lf#; ;3;:
lTll.lll rLJII
"i'
{J'l!
:{
tr
{r'0-o
Ctr9.1 =u
fOr,-.rCnl!h:.
E .x u=#!.-
:-sl,!l,F;i6 + 5 E T"o_i,[4[5iuqiuu:€ fr fi 5 5:1tt
4rtr!
o;
GU
.'r -_- C
H.*E*. ;Ee*'.1Cq.9!quLrtr,l,u{-' .6u 60E{:D1
-rua!!11!...=aEgi!il-i',|: q".'J r o f q
! q l: Lll Ll -'. ff
l-o*,g
o
s
rctg
(u
I *,o
-J
6c
.9+,(Ez
c.l
()
-
b0
lv
vl
ltJ
UE|r3oo
'-'n
1H
=igE<3a.Fur<az
Ib
Soil Map-Carver County, Minnesota
(Figure 3 Soils Map)
Map Scale: 1 : 2,180 if fi nted on A porb"it (8.5" x 1 1,,) sheet.
^, Metersl!030mlif 180A reetl\0 1mm4{/.r.600Z\ l4ap projedion: Web [4trctor Comercoordjnates: WGSS4 EdqetiG: UTN4 Zor€ 15N WGSB4
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
=
440 53'5'N 44.53'5'N
=
10110t2021
Page 1 of 3
440 52'50" N
USDA Natural Resources
- Conservation Service
440 52',50" N
Soil Map-Carver County, Minnesota Figure 3 Soils Map
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name I Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
CW Cordova-Webster compf ex I l.q 32.0%
EX Essexville sandy loam 0.7 15-8o/o
KB Xif f,enny Lest"r f "ar., Z t" O
percent slopes
0.2 5.3%
KE2 Lesier-Kilkenny complex, 16 to I 0.8
22 percent slopes I
19.1%
MP Klossner and Muskego soils,
ponded,0tolpercent
sropes
1.2 27.704
Totals for Area of Interest 4.3 100.0%
USDA Natural Resources
=- ConservationService
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
10t10t2021
Page 3 of 3
Figure 4 PWI Map
Map layers, Carver Gounty Parcels
PWI(Lentic)
-
PWI (Lotic)
- Property Boundary0 .02 .04 .06
- -
Mites
Figur 5 Delineation Map
Map layers
-- -' Wetland Boundary
o Sample Point
Carver Gounty Parcels
2ft Contours
- Property Boundary0 .02 .04 .06
I I
Miles
Figure 6 Topographic Map
Map layers
r Carver County Parcels
2ft Contours
Property Boundary0 .02 .04 .06
I Ir Miles
!
3
R
Hydric Rating by Map Unit-Carver County, Minnesota
(Figure 7 Hydric Rating Map)
44.53',5"N 440 53'5'N
Map SGle: 1 : 2,180 if printed on A porb-ait (8.5" x 1 1',) shet.
n, ,Metelsl\030m1zJ180
A psetf\0 lm2g)4m600
Z\ N4apprcjtrtion: WebN4ercator Comercmrdinates: WGSB4 Edqeucs: UTMZonelsNWGSS4
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
=
3
B
10t10t2021
Page 1 of 5
440 52 50" N
USDA Natural Resources
- Conservation Service
440 52'50'N
N*
Q c.r
=5,oo
o-
=U)
>^
17)
w)d
OO
=o-G
c
E$z
(5
a
0)
.E
I
d>
9€
t5 /i,
c>-T
>=>\ooiro-
FGt
O.E
I
o',ohg.;
o.=,98
Fb
=o
zo
4tl
p c'r
;€^=o6€l!-
s ; ;lEp
- s r
Ea=E t -*Eff=ci g I EEsc e r€F[;FE sE* s i+;sg fi93tg; FA ElE E :E$iE : F*€t€i+uEE$ g gEAg
i$,:irFetfgEggH€€C:
e' ;efl E€t$* e: c* ts r ;gBE
Tq :Hr scil*fr c* ;; A5 a_ giEg
pp;ss geE€$k re aE EE ER #EEE
E
E
€)
oZEo;
-d=tsq=
=Ytr=osll o)z.Eo-E
=F
@
o-
=od
F-tr l-:
o!;*CE.9abo
-oHH.ii*g eP f*o-6Y)tr4?€
=;-.Y)Y-co Y o N'X b.9tr E f > j E<
oo; f !l \ o)r: + , I rts - f ." dIFdl
€*3
-4-go3 FFG^E sFa-E sss-E fH ,83giltE sEEiSE sBEil8: g
^'P H8 ; ; .e .e : 3 'e A ! o o x ; ; B E: E0: g5 g O e: ? i @ o3: Xs : s s F f Ee € € € i i Ee e" € n i EuU dg ggBE I 5g!.ss,; ; eccsE E ; cri!E< oI I I I z 2 oI I i i 2 2 ot i i i Z Z 9.6@trca=EH.E,Ei,,*nllnntEt I : : I : *.rtrtr.o;E -bd 6<.ng
ozIrlo
IIJJ
o-
=
Hydric Rating by Map Unit-Carver County, Minnesota Figure 7 Hydric Rating Map
Hydric Rating by Map Unit
Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating I Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
CW Cordova-Webster
complex
100 32.0%
EX Essexville sandy loam 0.7100 15.8%
KB Kilkenny-Lester loams, 2
to 6 percent slopes
0
-=--5
100
0.2 5.3%
KE2
I
_l
Totals for Area of lntere:
Lester-Kilkenny
complex, 16lo 22
_ryr""nt rlol"" _ -
Klossner and Muskego
soils, ponded, 0 to 1
percent slopes
T-0.8 19.1%
1.2 27.7%
i
4.3 100.0%
USDA
-
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
10t10t2021
Page 3 of 5
Appendix A
Antecedent Precipitation Data
Minnesota State Climatology Office
5ji.a|e {.lrmatr-rlcgy Cffice , 0f ii{ Divislorr r.:f f,coluq;c,rl ald Wat.<.-r l{cstrrr., r
honrelcurrentconditionsljournal lpastdatalsummarieslagriculturelothersiteslaboutusffiji
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: Carver Beach section number: 2
Aerial photograph or site visit date:
Friday, October 8,2021
Score using 1981-2010 normal period
Other Resources:
. retrieve daily precipitation data. view radar-based precipitation estimates. view weekly precipitation maps. Evaluating Antecedent Precipitation Conditions (BWSR)
values are in inches
A'R'following a monthly total indjcates a provisional value derived from
radar-based estimates.
first prior month:
September
2021
secono pflor
month:
August
2021
third prror
monIn.
July 2021
estimated precipitation total for this location:?-t3
2.51
7.72R 1.50R
there is a 30% chance this location will have less than:3.09 21A
there is a 30% chance this location will have more than:4.67 5.43 4.17
type of month: dry normat wet ,monthlyscore 3xf =?l 2.3=6 | 1*t=1
multi-month score:
ii li: !) (dry1 10 to 14 (norrlal) 15 to 18 (wet))o = rten,"q1
Minnesota State Climatology Office
:jial€ Clrmatoloqy Oiil<.<:-DllR D:vi:jon of koiort:rai .rrrd yta.r,:rr ilt,:,uiir,,
homelcurrentcondrtionsljoLrrnal lpastclatalsunrmarieslagriculturelothersiteslaboutusffi
Nearest $tation Precipitation Data Retrieval
Minnesota's precipitation data archive is searched fordata closestto a selected target location foreach month. Values
from the site closest to the target location are returned below after clicking the retrieve monthty data or retrieve daily
data buttons. The precipitation data are made up of measured rainfall and the measured liqurd 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 retrievaltool (May 2014). NationalWeather
service precipitation data continue to be available from this applicatron.
Obtaining data for legal purposes
Guide for colunrn headers in the data table
target location: Carver-Lake minnewashta-Carver Beach 1'l6N 23W 32 (latitude: 44.88459longitude: 93.55124)
I-ir.r i" r"i"Ci tris"il"*ii"""]
years: 2021 w Io 2021 Y
number of missing days allowed per month: s
iEt'"* ffiihrt-d"t" ] f .;"t'il; ;"'rfi ;6-i
resu lts:
Target: T116 R23 52
mon year cc tttN rrw ss
,Jan 2021 l0 116N 23W 15
Peb 2021 r0 116N 23W 15
Mar 2021 10 1l6N 23W 15
Apr 2021 10 116N 23w 13
May 2021 10 116N 23w 15
Jun 2021 l0 116N 23W 15
J:uI 202 1 10 116N 23W 15
Aug 2021 10 l16N 23w 15
Sep 2021 10 116N 23w 15
OcL 202I
Nov 202 1
Dec 2021
nnnn oooooooo
NWS CHAN-NWS
NWS CHAN-NWS
NWS CHAN-NWS
BYRG
BYRG
BYRG
NWS CHAN-NWS
I]YRG
NWS CHAN-NWS
m
m
m
nrp /inahaqt
I .06
2 .36
2 .80
3.29
1 .28
2.lI
7 .28
2.L3
^l -
2 mi .
2 mi.
2 mi.
2 mi.
2 mi .
2 mi.
2 mi.
2 mi.
2 mi.
999 mi.
999 mi.
999 mi.
tor precrprtat on data while the NWS lD' wil always be correct for tho temperature dala lf no PLS info ls supplied the thc 'NWS lD' number app ies 10 at shown data
State Climatology Office - MnDNR - Ecological and Water Resources
Appendix B
Sample Data Sheets
[)rolect/Site 1441 Lake Lucy Rd
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
City/County:Chanhassen
Applicant/Owner: ChadHalbur State IVN
Sampling Date
Sampling Point
10t08t2021
1Up
Investigator(s): Jessica Lillie iectron, Township, Range Sec. 2, T1 16N, R23W
Lanoform (hillslope. terrace, etc.)toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none)
Slope (%): 2-3%LAI:Long Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name Cordova-Wedbester complex \Wl Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical forthis time of the year? Y (lf no, explain in remarrsl
Are vegetation , or hydrology s;ignificantly disturbed?, soll
Are vegetation _, soil
SUMMARY Or TNIOIruCS
-
, or hydrology_ naturaliy problematic?
convex
Are "normal circumstances"
present? Ycs
(lf needed, explain any answers in remarks.)
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
Hydrophytic vr..getation present?
llydric soil present?
Indicators of wetland hydrology present?
Y
N
N
ls the sampled area within a wetland?
f yes, optional wetland site lD:
Ilqq9tratuO
1 filia americana
(Plot size:30
Absolute Dominan Indicator
% Cover t Species Staus
70 FACU
FACW
80 = Total Cover
FAC
70 = Total Cover
N
N
FAC
72 = Total Cover
0 = Total Cover
2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10
70
3
4
5
Saplinq/Shrub stratun (Plot size:
1 Rhamnus catharlrca
t3
2
3
4
5
1_l€rL$rc!m
1 Rhamnus cathaftrca
(Plot size:
60 EAA
FACW
2 Carex pensylvanica UPLN
3 Viola sororia
4 Pilea pumila
5
6
7
8
I
10
Wopdy v4e_sllqlqll
1
(Plot size:30
Dominance Test Worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Spe cies Across all Strata; 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.670/0 (A/B)
Prevalence Index Worksheet
Total % Cover of:
OBLspecies 0 x1=
FAUW specres 12 x2 =
FACspecies -lg5 *g=
FACU species --76- , q =
UPLspec,es 5 x5-
Column totats --ZZl- 61
0---;-
4Os
280
%
I Jt+ (bl
Prevalencc 1n,1ul =114 =3.31
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%
_ Prevalence index is <3.0-
Morphogical adaptations. (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
_ separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation"
_ (explain)
-lndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
r-rydrophyttc
vegetation
present? Y
Remarks: (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histisol (Al )
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A+7
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10)
__ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (A12)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S'1 )
_ 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (Sti)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (FB)
Sampling Point:
lndicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Dark Surface (57) (LRR K, L)
-lron-Manganese
Masses (Fl2) (LRR K, L, R)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (explain in remarks)
*lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic
HYDROLOGY
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
MAIII
Color (moist) %Color (moist) % Type- Loc*.
1 0YR2/1
-Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. ..Locatron: pL= pore Lininq, M = Matrix
Restrictive Layer (if
Type.Hydric soil present?
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
fulfprv Indicators (min
_ Surface Water (A1 )
_ Hlgh Water Table (A2)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Water Marks (81)
_ Scdiment Deposits (82)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
-Alqal
Mat or Crust (84)
lron Deposits (85)
- lnundation Visible on Aerial lmagery (87)
- Sparsely Vegetated Concavc Surface (BB)
Water-Stained Leaves (Bg)
Aquatic Fauna (B'13)
True Aquatic Plants (814)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl )
Oxidized Rhrzospheres on Livrng Roots
(c3)
Presence of Reduced lron (C4)
Recent lron Reduction ln Tilled Soils
(c6)
Thin Muck Surfacc (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain ln Remarks)
Secondarv I ndicators (mini mum of_ two req.l41qd_
Surface Soil Cracks (86)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Cray.fish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial lmagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
X Depth (inches):
X Depth (inches): >24-
-X- Depth (inches) : >ZT-
Field Observations:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes
Yes
Yes
NO
No
No
Indicators of wetland
hydrology present?N
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
{emarKS:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Project/Site 1441 Lake Lucy Rd
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
City/Ccrunty: Chanhassen Sampling Date: lOlOBl2O2j
State: MN Sampling Point: 1 Wet
Section, Township, Range: Sec. 2, T1 16N, R23W
Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none)concave
LOng:Datum
PFOlA
, or hydrology_ significantly disturbed? Are ,,normal circumstances
, or hydrology rraturally problematic?present? Ycs
(lf needed, explain any answers in remarks.)
Applicant/Owner: ChadHalbur
Investigator(s): Jessica l-illie
Landform (hillslope, terrace. etc.)
Slope (%): 0-1% Lat:
Soil Map Urt Nrr"C-CouuW"n.GEffi tlWl Classification:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Y (lf no, explain in remamsl
Are vegetation _, soil
Are vegetation _, soil
SUDIMARY OF FINDINGS
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Y
llydric soil present? Y | '.
the sampled area within a wefland? y
lndicators of wetland hydrology present? Y I f yes, optional wetland site lD:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
JU screntrlrc names
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30
1 Fraxinuspennsylvanica
Absolute Dominan lndicator
% Cover t Species Staus
FACW
30 = Total Cover
0 = Total Cover
75
FACW
30
2
3
A
5
Saplinq/Shrub stratun
1
(Plot size IJ
tl_crb stratunl
1 Carex /acusfrls
2
3
4
5
(Plot size
OBL
2 Phalaris arundinacea 20
Dominance Test Worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata: 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC. 100.00% (A/B)
Prevalence Index Worksheet
Iotal ok Cover of:
OBLspecies 75 x1= 75. -----=:--FACW specres 50 x2 = 100
FACspecies O-*S- 0
FACU species --T-* + - O
UPL species --i-" S = 0
Column totats -T25 (nt --Tzs rgr
Prevalence Index = B/A = 130
95 = Total Cover
0 = Total Cover
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
1O
W oo d V, vl ne ! trq_tu_{ll
1
(Plot size:30
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test is >50%-I- Prevalence index is <3.0*
Morphogical adaptations. (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
_ separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetatton.
_ (explain)
'lndicators of hydrjc soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
nyoropnyUc
vegetation
present? Y
Remarks: (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
X 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_Thick Dark Surface (A12)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S'1 )
_ 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (Sf;)
Stripped Matrix (56)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl )
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (FB)
Sampling Point:
lndicators for Hydric Soils:
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L)
-lron-Manganese
Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (explain in remarks)
"lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltarrd
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic
HYDROLOGY
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Mslrg
Color (moist) %
Ecdq&elues
Oolor (moist) % Type' Loc**
10YR2/1
.Type: C = Concentration, D= Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. ..Locatron: PL= Pore Lining, M = Matrrx
rictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric soil present? Y
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
fuLmarv lndicators (minimum of one is required: check all that applv)
_ Surface Water (Al )
X H,gh Watcr lab e (A2)
X Saturation {43)
_ Water Marks (Bl )
_ Sediment Deposits (82)
_ t)rift Deposrrs (83)
_Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ lron Deposits (85)
lnundation Visible on Aerial lmagery (87)
- Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
Water Stainco Leaves (B9l
Aquatic Fauna (813)
True Aquatic Plants (814)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl )
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Lrving Roots
(c3)
Presence of Reduced lron (C4)
Recent lron Reduction in Tilled Soils
(c6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
S e c o n d a rv I n d i c a to rs ( m i n i m u m pl_!wo1e_qq1re d)
Surface Soil Cracks (BO)
Drainage Patterns (Bl 0)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (CB)
Saturation Visible on Aerial lmagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl )
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches): 6-
Depth (inches): 0
-
Frelo ubservattons:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes
Yes
Yes
NoX
--X- No
-X- No
Indicators of wetland
hydrology present? y
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
\emarKS:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
f)roject/Site 1441 Lake Lucy Rd
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
City/County: Chanhassen Sampling Date: 1OlOBl2O21
State: IVN Sampling Point: 2 Up
Section, Township, Range: Sec. 2, Tl 16N, R23W
footslope Local relief (concave, convex, none)convex
LOng:Datum
Applicant/Owner. ChadHalbur
lnvestigator(s): Jessica Lillie
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc. )
Slope (%): 2-3fo Latr
Soil Map Unil Name Cordova-Webster Complex \Wl Classification
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for thrs time of the year? Y (lf no, explain in remarks)
Are vegetation _, soil
Are vegetation _, soil
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
, or hydrology_ significantly disturbed?
, or hydrology naturally problematrc?
Are "normal circumstances"
present? Yes
(lf needed, explain any answers in remarks.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants.
Hydrophytic vegetation present?
Hydric soil present?
N
N ls the sampled area within a wetland? N
Indicators of wetland hydrology present? N I f yes. optional wetland site lD:
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
Tree Slratum
1 Tilia americana
(Plot size 30
Absolute Dominan lndicator
% Cover t Spectes Staus
FACU
30 = Jotal Cover
EAA
30 = Total Cover
45
10
30
2
3
/
5
S?plhE_Shrub stratun
1 Rhamnus cathaftica
(Plot size tc
30
llsbslrclurl
1 Carex pensylvanica
2_
3
4
5
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
(Plot size
2 Rhamnus cathartica FAC
60 = Total Cover
0 = Total Cover
N
N
UPL
OBL3 Carex /acustrls
Wqody v_pe_ slralUry
1
/Plnt cizo'30
Dominance Test Worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across all Strata: 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33.33% (A/B)
Prevalence Index Worksheet
Iotal o/o Cover of:
OBLspecres 5 x1=
FACW species 0 x2 =
FACspecies - +O "S=i-AUU spectes 30 x 4 .-
UPL species --l!--1 5 =
Column totats --176-
1n;
5
O
1n
ao
2n
+zo tel
Prevalence lna"" = g/A =3.92
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
_ Dominance test is >50%
_ Prevalence index is <3.0.
Morphogical adaptations. (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
_ separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation.
_ (explain)
'lndicators of hydric soll and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic)
l-rydrophyttc
vegetation
present? N
Remarks: (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
SOIL
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histisol (Al )
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
._ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
__ Stratified Layers (A5)
_2 cm Muck (A10)
_- Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_Thick Dark Surface (A12)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
_ 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54)
Sandy Redox (55)
Stripped Matrix (56)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface 1F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Dark Surface (57) (LRR K, L)
-lron-Manganese
Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_Other (explain in remarks)
*lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic
HYDROLOGY
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
l-l o nth
( | nches)Color (moist) % Type. Loc**
.Type: C =Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS=MaskedSandGrains. -.Location: pL=pore Lining, M =Matrix
Restrictive Layer (if
Type,
Depth (inches):
Hydric soil present?
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prrmaly Indrcators (minimum of one is required: check all that applv)
_ Surface Water (A1)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Water Marks (Bl )
_ Sediment Deposits (82)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
lron Deposits (85)
- Inundation Vrsible on Aerial lmagery (87)
- Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Water-stained Leaves (Bg)
Aquatic Fauna (813)
True Aquatic Plants (814)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl )
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots
(ca)
Presence of Reduced lron (C4)
Recenl lron Reduction n Tilled Soils
(c6)
I'hin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
S eco n d a ry I n d i cato rs ( m i n i m u m_ ptWp_ 15>_qq rlq!.)
SurJace Soil Cracks (86)
Drainage Patterns (Bl 0)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial lmagery (C9)
Stunted or Slressed Plants (Dl )
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
X Depth (inches):
F Depth (inches): ----;A---J- Oeptn (inches): - >24-
rrero uDservaltons:
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturatron present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
NO
No
Indicators of wetland
hydrology present?N
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
xe marKS:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Project/Site 1441 Lake Lucy Rd
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region
City/County: Chanhassen Sampling Date: 1Ol0Bl2O21
State: MN Sampling Point: 2.--Wet
iection, Township, Range: Sec.2, T116N, R23W
Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
present? Yes
(lf needed, explain any answers in remarks.)
Applicant/Owner ChadHalbur
Investigator(s): Jessica Lillie
Landform (hillslopc. terrace, etc.):
Slope (%): 0 Lat
Soil Map Unit Name Klossner and Muskego soils, ponded \Wl Classification:
Are climatlc/hydrologtc conditions of the site typical forthis time of the year? Y (lf no, exptain in remamsl
Datum:
PABH
orhydrology_ significantlydisturbed? Are,,normalcircumstances,,Are vegetation , soil
Are vegetation _, soil , or hydrology naturally problematic?
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Hydrophytic vegetation present?
Hydric soil present?
Y
Y ls the sampled area within a wetland? Y
Indicators of wetland hydrology present? y I f yes, optional weiland site lD:
Remarks: (Explain aiternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of olants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30
Absolute Dominan Indicator
% Cover t Species Staus
1 Fraxinuspcnnsylvanica 10 FACW
z
3
A
5
10 = l-otal Cover
SapjrndShruustrelq! (PIot size:
1 Rhamnus cathaftica
IJ
10 FAC
2
3
4
5
10 = Total Cover
f erb $ralut
1 Lemna obscura
(Plot size:
20 OBL
2 Carex /acuslris 10 OBL
Dominance Test Worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
thal are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Specjes Across all Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: '100.00% (A/U)
Prevalence Index Worksheet
Total % Cover of:
OBL species 35 x 1 =. -----:=--I-ACW species 25 x2'-
FAC species --lO-":
=.-------:-FAUUSpecres U x4-
UPL species --l-r S =
Column totats --)O-
1n1
35
50
3O
0
0
rrs lni
Prevalence tna": g/A 1.64
ypna FACW
4
5
6
7
B
I
10
Typha angustifolia FACW
Persicaria amphibra OBL
50 = Total Cover
Wqodj vine str_alulir
1
(Plot size:30
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
X Dominance test ls >50%
-I-Prevalence index is <3 O.
Morphogical adaptations. (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
_ separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation.
_ (explain)
"lndicators of hydric soil and wetiand hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
z
0 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic
vegetation
present? Y
Remarks: (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
sorL
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histisol (Al )
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
X 2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al l )
_Thick Dark Surface (A12)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
_ 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54)
Sandy Redox (Sli)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (FB)
Sampling Point:2 Wet
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L)
-lron-Manganese
Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (explain in remarks)
*lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltarrd
hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or
problematic
HYDROLOGY
le Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
M4!I
Color (moist) %Color (moist) % Type- Loc"-
1 0YR2/1
10YRzi 1
llype: C = Concentration, D= Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = MaskedSand Grains. ..Location: pL= pore Lininq, M = Matrix
Hydric soil present?
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
P!!1arv Indicators (minl
X Surface Water (Al )
X Hrgh Water Table (A2)
X Saturation (A3)
_ Water Marks (Bl )
_ Sedrment Deposits (B2)
_ Drift Deposrts (U3)
_Algal Mat or Crrst 1841
_ lron Deposits (85)
Inundation Visible on Aerial lmagery (87)
- Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (ts8)
Warer-Stained Leaves (Bg)
Aquatic Fauna (813)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl )
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots
(ca)
Presence of Reduced lron (C4)
Recent lron Reduction in Tilled Soils
(c6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Secondarv Indrcators (minimum of two requi.red.)
Surface Soil Cracks (86)
Drainage Patterns (t3 1 0)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial lmagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D 1 )
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface water present?
Water table present?
Saturation present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Yes X
Yes --T-
Yes ---T-
Depth (inches): 0
Depth (inches):
-T-Deptn iinchesj: ----- 0--
No
No
No
Indicators of wetland
hydrology present?Y
Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
l{emarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region
Appendix C
Site Photographs
Appendix C Site Photographs
Basin L
t-U p
1_Wet
Basin 2
2-U p
2 Wet
Appendix D
Wetland Type and Boundary Approval Forms
Project Name and/or Number:
PART ONE: Applicant Information
lf applicant is an entity (company, government entity, partnership, etc.), an authorized contact person must be identified. lf the
applicant is using an agent (consultant, lawyer, or otherthird party) and has authorized them to act on their behalf, the agent s
contact information must also be provided.
Applicant/Landowner Name: Dlanne G. Morin
Mailing Address: 1441 Lake Lucy Rd, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Phone: 952-474-It86
E-mailAddress: gayle.morin@gmail.com
Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above): Chad Halbur
Mailing Address: 4470 W 78th Street Circle, Suite 200, Bloomington, MN 55435
Phone: 6t2-462-3072
E-mailAddress: Chalbur@cornerstonetrust.net
Agent Name: Wayne Jacobson, WDC, pSS Jacobson Environmental
Maifing Address: 5B2L Humboldt Ave N Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Phone: 612-802-661,9
E-mailAddress: jacobsonenv@msn,com
PART TWO: Site Location Information
County: Carver County City/Township: Chanhassen
Parcel lD and/or Address: 1441 Lake Lucy Rd, Chanhassen, MN 55317
Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): Section 2,TtI6 N, 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): 4.9 acres
lf you'know that your proposal will require an individual Permit from the U,S. Army Corps of Engineers, you must provide the
namesandaddressesofall propertyownersadjacenttotheprojectsite. Thisinformationmaybeprovidedbyattachingalistto
your application or by using block 25 of the Application for Department of the Army permit which can be obtained at:
http:/lwww,mvp.usace.armv.mil/Portals/57ldocs/resulatorv/ReeulatorvDocs/engform 4345. zO12oct.pdf
PART THREE: General Project/Site Information
lf 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. Theproject description must fully describe the nature and scope of the proposed activity including a description of all project elementsthat effect aquatic resources (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) and must also include plans and cross section or profile drawings
shovrling the location, character, and dimensions of all proposed activities and aquatic resource impacts.
L Minnesota Interagency water Resource Application Form Februarv 201,4 Page 3 of 1L
l Project Name and/or Number:
PART FOUR: Aquatic Resource lmpactl Summary
lf your proposed project involves a direct or indirect impact to an aquatic resource (wetland, lal<e, 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.
1lf impactsaretemporary; enterthedurationoftheimpactsindaysnexttothe"T". Forexample,aprojectwithatemporaryaccessfill that
would be removed after 22O days would be entered "T (220\" .
2lmpacts less than 0.0L acre should be reported in square feet. lmpacts 0.0L acre or greater should be reported as acres and rounded to the
nearest0.01 acre. Tributaryimpactsmustbereportedinlinearfeetof impactandanareaof impactbyindicatingfirstthelinearfeetof impactalong'theflowlineofthestreamfollowedbytheareaimpactinparentheses). Forexample,aprojectthatimpacts50feetofastreamthatis6
feet rry.ide would be reported as 50 ft (300 square feet).
]].hit,1; e1n"t:1y only applicable if you are applying for a de minimis exemption under MN Rules 8420.0420 Subp, 8, otherwise enter ,,N/A,,.
aUse Wetland Plants and Plant Community Types of Minnesoto qnd Wisconsin 3rd Ed. as modified in MN Rules g420.0405 Subo, 2.sReferto Majorwatershed and Bank service Area maps in MN Rules g42o.os22subp. 7.
lf any of the above identified impacts have already occurred, identify which impacts they are and the circumstances associateo
with each:
PART FIVE: Applicant Signature
f, cfreckhereifyouarerequestingapre-applicationconsultationwiththeCorpsandLGUbasedontheinformationvouhave
provi.ded. 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.
Signatu re:Date: t0/L1,/202L
I hereby authorize Jacobson Environmental 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.
1 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 toi indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement.
I Minnesota Interagency water Resource Application Form Februarv 201,4
Aquatic Resource
lD (as noted on
ove,r'head v ew)
Aquatic
Resource Type
(wetland, lake,
tributary etc.)
Type of lmpact
(fill, excavate,
dra in, or
remove
vegetation)
Duration of
lmpact
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
{T)'
Size of lmpact2
Overall Size of
Aquatic
Resource 3
Existing Plant
Community
Type(s) in
lmpact Areaa
County, Major
Watershed #,
and Bank
Service Area #
of lmpact Area:
Page 4 of LL
Project Name and/or Number:
Attachment A
Request for Delineation Review, Wetland Type Determination, or
J urisdictional Determination
By submission of the enclosed wetland delineation report, lam requesting thatthe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. paul District
(Corps) and/or the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (LGU) provide me with the following (check allthat apply):
I Wetland Type Confirmation
ffi Oelineation Concurrence. Concurrence with a delineation is a written notification from the Corps and a decision from the LGU
concurring, not concurring, or commenting on the boundaries of the aquatic resources delineated on the property. Delineation
concUrrences are generally valid for five years unless site conditions change. Under this request alone, the Corps will not adoress
the jurisdictional status of the aquatic resources on the property, only the boundaries ofthe resources within the review area
(including wetlands, tributaries, lakes, etc.).
I ereliminary Jurisdictional Determination. A preliminary jurisdictional determination (pJD) is a non-binding written indicatron
from the Corps that waters, including wetlands, identified on a parcel may be waters of the United States. For purposes of
computation of impacts and compensatory mitigation requirements, a permit decision made on the basis of a pjD will treat allwatersandwetlandsinthereviewareaasiftheyarejurisdictional watersoftheU.S. pJDsareadvisoryinnatureandmavnotbe
appealed.
l-l Approved Jurisdictional Determination. An approved jurisdictional determination (AJD) is an official Corps determination thatjurisdictional waters of the United States are either present or absent on the property. AJDs can generally be relied upon by the
affected party for five years. An AJD may be appealed through the Corps administrative appeal process.
In order for the Corps and LGU to process your request, the wetland delineation must be prepared in accordance with the 19g7
Corpsof EngineersWetlandDelineationManual,anyapprovedRegional SupplementstothelgBTManual,andthe Guidelinesfor
Submitting Wetlond Delineotions in Minnesoto (2013).
http://www. mvp. usa ce.a rmy. mil/M issiQns/Regu lato:^v/D_elineationJ DGu ida nce.aspx
Minnesota Interagency water Resource Application Form February 2ol4 Page 5 of L1