HomeMy WebLinkAbout_06 20 2022 City Council Agenda PacketAerial Photo
Grainwood Park, 4360 Quincy Street SE and
Wagon Bridge Peninsula (PID 259350410)
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 1/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
Bank 1 General Bank
78.00 Apr 2022 COBRA Admin FeeALERUS000013758582(E)105/23/2022
1,147.58 Apr 2022 Admin FeesDELTA DENTAL000272138583(E)105/23/2022
2,303.04 2022 Dental Claims
3,450.62
14,300.14 May 2022 Electric BillsMN VALLEY ELECTRIC000137388584(E)105/23/2022
1,655.32 May 2022 Phone BillsNUVERA000193048585(E)105/23/2022
86,949.70 Jun 2022 Health Insurance PremiumsMN PEIP000279098586(E)105/24/2022
364.00 May 2022 HSA Admin FeesALERUS000013758587(E)105/26/2022
11,829.43 May 2022 Natural Gas BillsCENTERPOINT ENERGY000135708588(E)105/27/2022
3,801.51 2022 Dental ClaimsDELTA DENTAL000272138589(E)105/31/2022
35,744.40 Jun 2022 Electric BillsXCEL ENERGY000147208590(E)105/31/2022
2,400.00 May 2022 Animal Control4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL LLC000067988591(A)106/03/2022
1,481.20 Hose, ClampABLE HOSE & RUBBER CO000011158592(A)106/03/2022
420.00 Tow Vehicles - TrainingALLEN'S SERVICE INC000013608593(A)106/03/2022
275.82 Donuts, MileageANDREW BROTZLER000276748594(A)106/03/2022
275.06 Framed CanvasANN SCHROEDER000270358595(A)106/03/2022
3,490.34 Spring Repairs - WTFAUTOMATED DOOR SERVICE INC000274198596(A)106/03/2022
479.24 397 TiresBAUER BUILT INC000021458597(A)106/03/2022
26.04 Exhaust clamp and mirrorBOYER FORD TRUCKS INC000027108598(A)106/03/2022
88.84 Lunch, Mileage - TrainingBRAD DOERR000281158599(A)106/03/2022
39.50 Fire Extinguisher Vehicle BracketCENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION000033008600(A)106/03/2022
2,250.00 Remove Elm - 4933 Chatonka Trl NECOLLINS TREE 000036708601(A)106/03/2022
195.00 Carpet Cleaning - Lakefront PavillionCOMMERCIAL STEAM TEAM000037258602(A)106/03/2022
3,300.00 IT SupportCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH000037608603(A)106/03/2022
2,498.00 May 2022 Office 365
5,798.00
223.99 Leaf Blower SlipCONCRETE CUTTING & CORING000037858604(A)106/03/2022
4,315.56 L/P SleeveCORE & MAIN000273288605(A)106/03/2022
6,998.00 Jun 2022 CleaningCOVERALL000275718606(A)106/03/2022
54.00 521 Tarp hooks CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT000039558607(A)106/03/2022
365.00 459 Wing plow mount block
(328.07)Control Kit
90.93
1,145.00 Service Agreement & Diagnosis at Sunset ELECTRIC PUMP000231208608(A)106/03/2022
1,119.75 Motor Starter - Sunset Trl Lift Station
2,264.75
5,842.00 Fire Hose TestingFIRECATT000064548609(A)106/03/2022
60.60 Air Filters & System Cleaning - FS #1G&B ENVIRONMENTAL INC000278748610(A)106/03/2022
196.80 Air Filters & System Cleaning - City Hal
98.40 Air Filters & System Cleaning - FS #2
49.20 Air Filters & System Cleaning - 4270 140
222.00 Air Filters & System Cleaning - Library
70.20 Air Filters & System Cleaning - Lakefron
160.60 Air Filters & System Cleaning - Maint Ct
170.40 Air Filters & System Cleaning - WTF
171.60 Air Filters & System Cleaning - PD
1,199.80
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 2/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
81.74 Erickson - UniformGALLS LLC000070758611(A)106/03/2022
110.94 Erickson - Sgt Uniform
192.68
165.00 Snowplow DecalsGRAFIX SHOPPE000076158612(A)106/03/2022
958.78 472 Sweeper tires HART BROS TIRE CO000082378613(A)106/03/2022
8,572.24 Water Treatment ChemicalsHAWKINS INC000083128614(A)106/03/2022
6,950.00 VAV Comm - PDHUMERATECH000271848615(A)106/03/2022
24.73 Address LabelsINNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS LLC000271498616(A)106/03/2022
81.46 Hagemann - Business Cards
56.18 Freiberg - Business Cards
48.34 Simon - Busiiness Cards
48.34 Cochran - Business Cards
225.91 Misc Office Supplies
484.96
102.02 Jan - May 2022 MileageKELSEY COY000112628617(A)106/03/2022
1,518.22 Pushbutton Valve AssemblyKULLY SUPPLY INC000119408618(A)106/03/2022
152,056.76 Jun 2022 Waste Water ServiceMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL000134008619(A)106/03/2022
64.00 May 2022 Random Drug TestingMN OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH000270998620(A)106/03/2022
366.56 May 2022 Random Drug Testing
430.56
486.07 PartsMTI DISTRIBUTING INC000139518621(A)106/03/2022
85.96 Hose
8.51 525 Spring
268.24 Toro mower parts
848.78
56.28 Toilet PaperNETWORK SERVICES COMPANY000143818622(A)106/03/2022
363.59 Apr/May 2022 MileageNICHOLAS MONSERUD000273908623(A)106/03/2022
508.04 ApparelNORTH AMERICAN SAFETY000145748624(A)106/03/2022
783.63 Apparel
495.00 Mechanics Gloves
1,786.67
111.00 Water KeysNOVAK COMPANIES000149008625(A)106/03/2022
17.92 Steel Angle
128.92
3,724.06 543 Accident repair PRIOR LAKE AUTO COLLISION000166048626(A)106/03/2022
602.77 May 2022 Misc SuppliesPRIOR LAKE HARDWARE000166588627(A)106/03/2022
718.00 PD Key Card RepairPRO-TEC DESIGN INC000274298628(A)106/03/2022
1,985.79 FS #1 Controller Upgrade
2,703.79
98.85 Trailer repair parts RIGID HITCH INC000184758629(A)106/03/2022
2,800.03 Tuition ReimursementROBERT FREIBERG000276968630(A)106/03/2022
413,478.87 #2 Downtown South ReconstructionRYAN CONTRACTING CO000281538631(A)106/03/2022
1,000.00 Inspection RepairsSCHWICKERT'S TECTA AMERICA LLC000279118632(A)106/03/2022
138.44 Mileage, Parking STEVE HART000281638633(A)106/03/2022
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 3/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
48.00 PartsVIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY000226308634(A)106/03/2022
993.66 Parts
1,041.66
310.12 452 Steering parts WOLF MOTOR CO INC000236758635(A)106/03/2022
87.98 453 Brake Lining Kits
177.10 452 Drag Link
270.60 452 Fan clutch
(138.60)Drag Link
(132.69)Spindle Rod
574.51
706.00 2022 Pond Maintenance ProjectWSB & ASSOCIATES INC000237808636(A)106/03/2022
301.00 Mini Storage WCA Replacement Plan Review
1,221.75 Prior Lake Subwatershed Assessment
731.00 2022 WCA LGU Support
1,316.00 PL Luxury Apartments
4,275.75
65.00 Mtce Center Pest ControlXTREME PEST SOLUTIONS INC000271168637(A)106/03/2022
948.09 2022 Dental ClaimsDELTA DENTAL000272138638(E)106/06/2022
19.75 May 2022 Merchant FeesAUTHORIZE.NET000268218639(E)106/02/2022
317.14 Jun 2022 Vision PremiumsEYEMED000279178640(E)106/07/2022
1,090.60 May 2022 Merchant FeesINVOICE CLOUD000280918641(E)106/07/2022
1,275.00 GO Bonds 2011ANORTHLAND TRUST SERVICES INC000147768642(E)106/09/2022
5,062.50 Taxable GO Bonds 2015B
8,240.00 GO Bonds 2013A
12,150.00 GO Bonds 2016A
27,181.25 GO Bonds 2017A
41,875.00 GO Bonds 2019A
69,577.50 GO Bonds 2021A
123,100.00 GO Bonds 2015A
130,120.00 GO Refunding Bonds 2021B
133,650.00 GO Bonds 2018A
552,231.25
952.23 FlowersBACHMAN'S INC000020358643(A)106/10/2022
380.00 Cardinal Overlook AdditionBOLTON & MENK INC000026378644(A)106/10/2022
544.00 Pike Lake Landing Const Observation
492.00 Towering Woods
1,416.00
895.82 May 2022 Misc SuppliesCARLSON HARDWARE COMPANY000031258645(A)106/10/2022
1,500.00 Storm Damage Removal - 16717 Williow Ln COLLINS TREE 000036708646(A)106/10/2022
2,880.00 IT SupportCOMPUTER INTEGRATION TECH000037608647(A)106/10/2022
354.00 Jun 2022 CleaningCOVERALL000275718648(A)106/10/2022
1,164.60 SuppliesDIAMOND VOGEL000044568649(A)106/10/2022
(546.40)Parts
618.20
9,225.00 Annual Lift Station Inspection ELECTRIC PUMP000231208650(A)106/10/2022
87.91 7107 Power tamer EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECH INC000054808651(A)106/10/2022
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 4/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
71.25 Baker - UniformGALLS LLC000070758652(A)106/10/2022
110.94 Erickson - Sgt Uniform
182.19
919.35 May 2022 LocatesGOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC000075258653(A)106/10/2022
912.64 May 2022 UniformsHUEBSCH000275368654(A)106/10/2022
34.63 Misc Office SuppliesINNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS LLC000271498655(A)106/10/2022
4.69 Post It Notes
67.31 Misc Office Supplies
106.63
37.57 Parkview Network SwitchKEVIN ROACH000185138656(A)106/10/2022
180.00 May 2022 PD Counseling ServicesLEAST SERVICES/COUNSELING LLC000276138657(A)106/10/2022
140.40 Mileage - MASS ConferenceLESLEY YOUNG000272408658(A)106/10/2022
3,540.00 SCBA Exams, Quantative Fit TestsMED-COMPASS INC000133068659(A)106/10/2022
1,914.73 PartsMTI DISTRIBUTING INC000139518660(A)106/10/2022
1,301.98 503 LH Door glass assembly
129.17 503 Front deck shock
3,345.88
940.76 Paper ProductsNETWORK SERVICES COMPANY000143818661(A)106/10/2022
481.28 Paper Supplies
1,422.04
165.00 RockPENTAGON MATERIALS INC000274268662(A)106/10/2022
400.00 Jun 2022 ROWay AppPERRILL000065028663(A)106/10/2022
525.58 Apr 2022 Data & SoftwarePRECISE MOBILE RESOURCE MGMT000165488664(A)106/10/2022
600.00 Inspection Repairs - FS#2SCHWICKERT'S TECTA AMERICA LLC000279118665(A)106/10/2022
1,500.00 Inspection Repairs - City Hall
2,100.00
155.44 E Coli SamplingUC LABORATORY000212358666(A)106/10/2022
78.04 Permit HoldersULINE000212508667(A)106/10/2022
101.32 City Hall Generator Door LatchZIEGLER INC000265008668(A)106/10/2022
456.68 UB REFUND ACCT #3-08967-01AARON ANDERSONREFUND-UB110141106/03/2022
4,510.00 PagersANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC00001654110142106/03/2022
450.00 Grade RoadART JOHNSON TRUCKING INC00001840110143106/03/2022
126.00 May 2022 Yoga InstructorASHLEY BITZAN00028004110144106/03/2022
270.00 1st Qtr 2022BCA/STATE OF MINNESOTA00002933110145106/03/2022
1,713.96 Electric Pump MotorCANNON ELECTRIC MOTOR00003092110146106/03/2022
105.00 May 2022 Tai Chi InstructorCHRISTINE T MORGAN00027316110147106/03/2022
56.34 Water - 4662 Dakota Street SECITY OF PRIOR LAKE00016810110148106/03/2022
56.34 Water - 4528 Colorado Street SE
112.68
150.00 Carpet Cleaning - MCCOMMERCIAL STEAM TEAM00003725110149106/03/2022
516.15 2nd Qtr 2022 Form 720 PCORI FeesDEPT OF TREASURY00004393110150106/03/2022
2,921.65 May 2022 RefuseDICK'S SANITATION INC00027918110151106/03/2022
159.55 Adjustable Sign BracketEARL F ANDERSEN INC00005175110152106/03/2022
4,483.03 Parts
(453.79)Scrap Aluminium Signs
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 5/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
4,188.79
2,999.00 Rectifier AssemblyEATON CORPORATION00005218110153106/03/2022
11,608.70 DuraBlend - Dust ControlENVIROTECH SERVICES INC00005589110154106/03/2022
160.83 Denmark - Sailboat AwardEXECUTIVE OCEAN00005947110155106/03/2022
900.00 Annual ReportFACTOR3 DIGITAL LLC00027539110156106/03/2022
343.41 Water MetersFERGUSON WATERWORKS #251600006231110157106/03/2022
1,413.43 Flags
79.50 Flags
491.92 Water Meters
2,492.34 Water Meters
2,320.00 Water Meters
3,962.29 Water Meters
200.98 Water Meters
177.00 Water Meters
4,100.00 Hydrant Buddy
(135.60)Paint
15,445.27
182.71 De-Icer WashFLEETPRIDE00003260110158106/03/2022
5,000.00 21-2440 16119 Northwood Road NWGEROLD BROS CONSTMISC-CD110159106/03/2022
2,025.48 Stock squad tires GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE00007510110160106/03/2022
17.47 O-RingGRAINGER INC00023030110161106/03/2022
738.28 Valve Rebuild Kit
755.75
921.42 Light Repair - Sand Pt & Carriage Hills HAYES ELECTRIC INC00008315110162106/03/2022
591.90 Repair Pump Motors
1,170.38 GFCI - Memorial Park Shelter
2,683.70
210.00 Apr 19 2022 Foot Care SessionHEALING HANDS FOR FEET00027618110163106/03/2022
2,960.00 VFD Preventative MaintenanceIDEAL SERVICE INC00009236110164106/03/2022
6,525.00 PW Team FacilitatorINNOVATIVE GROWTH LLC00028144110165106/03/2022
653.94 Sgt & Commander BadgesJACK'S UNIFORMS & EQUIPMENT00027636110166106/03/2022
360.00 Apr 2022 Zumba InstuctorJENNIFER MARTH00028123110167106/03/2022
100.00 Water Effciency RebateJOHN MATEJCEKREFUND-MSC110168106/03/2022
2,500.00 21-0918 17792 Meadows Way SEKEYLAND HOMESMISC-CD110169106/03/2022
3,788.80 Weapon Order KIESLER POLICE SUPPLY00027905110170106/03/2022
3,772.78 CSAH 21 Underpass ConceptKLJ ENGINEERING LLC00028068110171106/03/2022
23,000.00 Claim #00000111399LEAGUE MN CITIES INS TRUS00012435110172106/03/2022
1,685.01 Gas CylindersMACQUEEN EMERGENCY 00027901110173106/03/2022
220.91 Tiger Blade
421.69 SCBA Bracket, Strap
413.22 New Engine Equipment
175.01 8784 Band lock couplers
87.00 8784 Vactor PTO switch
3,002.84
3,933.85 Contract Base Charge ChangeMARCO TECHNOLOGIES LLC00027647110174106/03/2022
17,221.05 May 2022 SAC ChargesMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL-SAC00013406110175106/03/2022
646.20 523 and 535 repair parts MIDWEST MACHINERY CO00028113110176106/03/2022
200.00 Driveway Repair - 15504 Omega Trl SEMINTA CONTRACTING00028161110177106/03/2022
22,863.00 2nd Qtr 2022 State SurchargeMN DEPT OF HEALTH00013618110178106/03/2022
170.00 Gould - Has Mat OperationsMN FIRE SERVICE CERTIFICATION BOARD00013630110179106/03/2022
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 6/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
23.00 Doerr - Wastewater Cert RenewalMN POLLUTION CONTROL AGCY00013850110180106/03/2022
35.00 Young - MASS ConferenceMN RECREATION & PARK ASSN00013670110181106/03/2022
52,997.75 Replacement portable fire radiosMOTOROLA00013937110182106/03/2022
1,330.00 Mpls St Paul Magazine AdMSP COMMUNICATIONS00027300110183106/03/2022
1,005.66 Apr 2022 Repair PartsNAPA AUTO PARTS00014060110184106/03/2022
194.84 MonitorNOW MICRO INC00027966110185106/03/2022
5,735.00 Fire Station #1 RemodelOERTEL ARCHITECTS00015155110186106/03/2022
56.70 Interpreter ServicesOFFICE OF MN IT SERVICES00004396110187106/03/2022
3,225.59 464 Cylinder Rod ResealPOWERPLAN00022435110188106/03/2022
88.38 8785 Fuel filters
187.66 510 Chipper main drive belt
3,501.63
697.00 Cement - Franklin Trl SERIVERS EDGE CONCRETE INC00018496110189106/03/2022
1,740.00 WoodchipsROCK HARD LANDSCAPE SUPPLY00018571110190106/03/2022
710.00 Pumper RepairROSENBAUER MN00027385110191106/03/2022
112.00 Archery Range SignSDDI SIGNS00027585110192106/03/2022
59.90 LumberSIWEK LUMBER & MILLWORK INC00019538110193106/03/2022
628.00 Water BottlesSPARTAN PROMOTIONAL GROUP INC00019706110194106/03/2022
500.00 Summer 2022 Special CleansSPECIALIZED SANITATION00019703110195106/03/2022
20.99 Personal Defense SpraySTREICHERS00019900110196106/03/2022
14.00 Personal Defense Spray
34.99
96.84 UB REFUND #1-05924-02TAMARA HENNESSYREFUND-UB110197106/03/2022
22.25 558 push mower belt TIM'S SMALL ENGINE REPAIR INC00020510110198106/03/2022
49.98 558 push mower blades
72.23
148.23 UB REFUND # 3-08986-01TODD HORNBACHER REFUND-UB110199106/03/2022
1,750.00 May 2022 Line Marking RentalTURFWERKS INC00020929110200106/03/2022
150,306.91 Honeywell EPC ContractUS BANK00002105110201106/03/2022
4,641.21 Jun 2022 Cell Phone BillsVERIZON WIRELESS00001315110202106/03/2022
300.00 SignsVOSS SIGNS LLC00022885110203106/03/2022
3,155.46 SignsWARNING LITES OF MINNESOTA00023196110204106/03/2022
76.94 Cable Ties, E-Track Ratchet StrapsZACKS INCORPORATED00026100110205106/03/2022
417,572.00 Fire Pumper TruckROSENBAUER MN00027385110206106/08/2022
87.50 Jun 1 2022 Technology Time ClassAMANDA FAY00027666110207106/10/2022
133.75 Pager RepairANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER00001655110208106/10/2022
133.75 Pager Repair
120.00 Pager Repair
133.75 Pager Repair
133.75 Pager Repair
120.00 Pager Repair
153.75 Pager Repair
928.75
83.10 UB refund for account: 20437201ANDERSON THOMASREFUND-UB110209106/10/2022
330.55 Uniform PantsASPEN MILLS00001891110210106/10/2022
4,466.02 Apr 2022 Lawn CareBIRD'S LAWN CARE00028164110211106/10/2022
4,466.02 May 2022 Lawn Care
8,932.04
171.47 UB refund for account: 20011900BORMAN KIMREFUND-UB110212106/10/2022
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 7/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
52.75 UB refund for account: 30082906BRUTLAG JAKEREFUND-UB110213106/10/2022
7,564.05 Class 5 - Gravel Roads BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC00002905110214106/10/2022
1,509.05 Rock
9,073.10
220.00 Parkview AV UpdateCAL-TEX ELECTRIC INC00003068110215106/10/2022
113.69 Natural Gas - 4528 Colorado St SECENTERPOINT ENERGY00013570110216106/10/2022
100.72 Mtce Center 1st Aid SuppliesCINTAS 00003506110217106/10/2022
39.27 40714200 IrrigationCITY OF PRIOR LAKE00016810110218106/10/2022
892.82 AsphaltCOMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO00003710110219106/10/2022
58.10 UB refund for account: 20088600CROOKS CHERIEREFUND-UB110220106/10/2022
3,988.82 May 2022 UB Billing CSG SYSTEMS INC00027506110221106/10/2022
15.21 UB refund for account: 40854800CUDDIGAN CUSTOM HOME BLDRSREFUND-UB110222106/10/2022
158.19 May 2022 Bottled WaterCULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER00003958110223106/10/2022
250.00 Noble - Data WorkshopDATA PRACTICES OFFICE00027547110224106/10/2022
250.00 Peppin - Data Workshop
500.00
485.00 Annual Maintenance FeeDATAWORKS PLUS LLC00028017110225106/10/2022
68.20 Hand tool batteries DELEGARD TOOL CO00004333110226106/10/2022
18.46 UB refund for account: 10100100DOLL PATRICK/HEATHERREFUND-UB110227106/10/2022
195.00 UB refund for account: 20709300DOLS RACHELREFUND-UB110228106/10/2022
72.08 UB refund for account: 10427600ELASKY JEFFREFUND-UB110229106/10/2022
395.00 May 2022 Yoga InstructorELEANOR ALLEN00028060110230106/10/2022
624.00 HoseENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT00005584110231106/10/2022
88.50 Water Efficiency RebateERIC VANCEREFUND-MSC110232106/10/2022
132.19 Water MeterFERGUSON WATERWORKS #251600006231110233106/10/2022
2,542.50 Water Meters
383.52 Water Meters
3,058.21
229.78 UB refund for account: 20314801GONZALEZ JAIMEREFUND-UB110234106/10/2022
24.00 Jun 2022 Go To Meeting LicenseGOTO TECHNOLOGIES USA INC00026895110235106/10/2022
500.00 Storm Drain Clean-Out - Candy Cove TrlH&H LANDSCAPE00028167110236106/10/2022
1,049.40 Lighting - City HallHAYES ELECTRIC INC00008315110237106/10/2022
390.00 May 17 2022 Foot Care SessionHEALING HANDS FOR FEET00027618110238106/10/2022
37.96 UB refund for account: 30373500HOLTHAUS MICHAELREFUND-UB110239106/10/2022
371.99 Mailbox Repair SuppliesHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES00008865110240106/10/2022
208.79 UB refund for account: 30916801HUBERTY GREGGREFUND-UB110241106/10/2022
21.12 UB refund for account: 20601103INGALLS CARRIEREFUND-UB110242106/10/2022
2,600.00 6/17/2022 Music in the ParkJAM CENTRAL LLC00028165110243106/10/2022
360.00 May 2022 Line Dance InstructorJANE BREEGGEMANN00027886110244106/10/2022
405.00 May 2022 Zumba InstuctorJENNIFER MARTH00028123110245106/10/2022
65.00 UB refund for account: 30321600KELLERMAN JODIEREFUND-UB110246106/10/2022
2,463.31 CSAH 21/Revere KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC00011372110247106/10/2022
8,424.00 Water Main Repair - 5500 Bounty St SEKRUEGER EXCAVATING00011828110248106/10/2022
45,710.00 Water Main Repair & Valves Install at Fi
54,134.00
42.47 UB refund for account: 10446901LOTTES CHRIS & HEIDIREFUND-UB110249106/10/2022
69.22 784 PTO Switch MACQUEEN EMERGENCY 00027901110250106/10/2022
107.20 PartsMENARDS LUMBER CO00013318110251106/10/2022
1,093.28 Parts
1,200.48
CHECK REGISTER FOR CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 8/8Page: 06/10/2022 11:47 AM
User: Janet
DB: Prior Lake CHECK DATE FROM 05/21/2022 - 06/10/2022
AmountDescriptionVendor NameVendorCheckBankCheck Date
675.00 Lift Station PumpingMIKE'S SEPTIC SERVICE00013502110252106/10/2022
201.60 Wedel - 2022 Membership DuesMN CITY/COUNTY MGMT ASSN00027619110253106/10/2022
35.00 Young - ConferenceMN RECREATION & PARK ASSN00013670110254106/10/2022
54.40 PartsMONNENS SUPPLY INC00013909110255106/10/2022
108.31 UB refund for account: 10037900MORGAN MAXINEREFUND-UB110256106/10/2022
690.61 UB refund for account: 30527200MULCAHY CHRISTOPHERREFUND-UB110257106/10/2022
116.00 UB refund for account: 40590003NOVAK JANELLEREFUND-UB110258106/10/2022
825.00 5 LCD MonitorsNOW MICRO INC00027966110259106/10/2022
51.04 UB refund for account: 10465400OHMAN JEFF & DONNAREFUND-UB110260106/10/2022
220.63 UB refund for account: 40696801POSCH JOHNREFUND-UB110261106/10/2022
40.60 TillerPRIOR LAKE RENTAL CENTER00016700110262106/10/2022
51.35 UB refund for account: 10023086PROPERTY HAUS REI LLCREFUND-UB110263106/10/2022
119.65 UB refund for account: 40838802PROUTY BRIANREFUND-UB110264106/10/2022
37.60 UB refund for account: 10366901RUPNICK DAVID & JEANNIREFUND-UB110265106/10/2022
111.74 UB refund for account: 40486005SCHWIERJOHANN MACOYREFUND-UB110266106/10/2022
140.00 UB refund for account: 10833100SNELL JEROMEREFUND-UB110267106/10/2022
286.65 May 2022 Legal AdsSOUTHWEST NEWS MEDIA00019676110268106/10/2022
1,780.00 PL American Inserts - Annual Report
2,066.65
15.77 UB refund for account: 10070401SPAULDING TABATHAREFUND-UB110269106/10/2022
82.00 May 2022 Special Cleans - PondsSPECIALIZED SANITATION00019703110270106/10/2022
2,704.00 June 2022 Portable Toilets & Special Cle
164.00 May 2022 Portable Toilets & Special Clea
2,950.00
51.77 Digital SubscriptionSTAR TRIBUNE00019744110271106/10/2022
520.38 May 2022 Misc SuppliesTRACTOR SUPPLY CREDIT PLAN00020663110272106/10/2022
19,820.00 Service on Well 7 TRAUT COMPANIES00020705110273106/10/2022
349.00 Water Softner SaltTRI COUNTY WATER METRO SOUTH00005247110274106/10/2022
1,750.00 Jun 2022 Line Marking RentalTURFWERKS INC00020929110275106/10/2022
621.59 PartsUSA BLUEBOOK00021882110276106/10/2022
52.42 UB refund for account: 20821701VANGRINSVEN JEFFREYREFUND-UB110277106/10/2022
1,050.00 Shred Event 5/19/22VETERAN SHREDDING LLC00027643110278106/10/2022
55.00 Jun 2022 Shredding Service
1,105.00
224.76 May 2022 Clear Law Enforcement PlusWEST PAYMENT CENTER00023420110279106/10/2022
67.73 UB refund for account: 30694801YOUNG PAUL & JULIEREFUND-UB110280106/10/2022
16.39 UB refund for account: 10356303ZILLOW HOMES, INC.REFUND-UB110281106/10/2022
1 TOTALS:
2,312,978.59 Total of 228 Disbursements:
0.00 Less 0 Void Checks:
2,312,978.59 Total of 228 Checks:
City of Prior Lake Expenditures- Payroll and BenefitsAs of 5/31/2022 (Preliminary & Unaudited)Activity for Activity for Variance from VariancePrevious Month Month 2022 2022 2022 Amended Budget ‐ % BDGTActual YTDfrom 20214/30/2022 5/31/2022 Budget Amended Actual YTD Positive (Negative) USED5/31/2021 Positive (Negative)GENERAL FUNDFunction: General Government41110.00 MAYOR & COUNCIL 5,647 4,717 68,728 68,728 24,716 44,012 36% 25,959 1,243 41320.00 ADMINISTRATION 27,466 21,944 276,235 276,235 108,947 167,288 39% 73,182 (35,765) 41330.00 BOARDS & COMMISSIONS 323 754 10,765 10,765 1,615 9,150 15% 2,338 723 41400.00 CITY CLERK FUNCTIONS 118 8,970 128,447 128,447 27,645 100,802 22% 42,493 14,848 41410.00 ELECTIONS 77 ‐ 57,690 57,690 154 57,536 0% 137 (17) 41520.00 FINANCE 41,496 49,731 570,810 570,810 186,172 384,638 33% 192,127 5,956 41820.00 HUMAN RESOURCES 22,923 22,229 287,689 287,689 101,571 186,118 35% 96,367 (5,204) 41830.00 COMMUNICATIONS 17,761 9,059 142,261 142,261 40,165 102,096 28% 40,899 734 41910.00 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 23,608 23,215 335,822 335,822 91,748 244,074 27% 110,001 18,254 41920.00 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 18,339 12,189 239,241 239,241 76,812 162,429 32% 79,150 2,338 41940.00 FACILITIES ‐ CITY HALL 7,195 6,364 88,220 88,220 32,437 55,783 37% 20,133 (12,305) Total ‐ Function General Government 164,952 159,173 2,205,908 2,205,908 691,982 1,513,926 31% 682,786 (9,196) Function: Public Safety42100.00 POLICE 505,046 365,301 5,445,654 5,445,654 1,910,609 3,535,045 35% 1,651,015 (259,594) 42200.00 FIRE 59,439 39,554 900,773 900,773 217,311 683,462 24% 191,553 (25,758) 42400.00 BUILDING INSPECTION 60,897 59,911 784,947 784,947 258,145 526,802 33% 236,974 (21,171) Total ‐ Function Public Safety 625,382 464,765 7,131,374 7,131,374 2,386,065 4,745,309 33% 2,079,542 (306,523) Function: Public Works43050.00 ENGINEERING 27,182 28,851 359,793 359,793 121,627 238,166 34% 118,176 (3,451) 43100.00 STREET 38,867 31,952 537,643 537,643 167,426 370,217 31% 180,392 12,967 43400.00 CENTRAL GARAGE 19,612 18,280 262,456 262,456 88,375 174,081 34% 83,493 (4,883) Total ‐ Function Public Works 85,661 79,084 1,159,892 1,159,892 377,428 782,464 33% 382,061 4,633 Function: Culture and Recreation45100.00 RECREATION 33,013 20,355 377,023 377,023 106,294 270,729 28% 90,895 (15,399) 45200.00 PARKS 86,777 79,506 1,162,215 1,162,215 373,830 788,385 32% 306,853 (66,977) Total ‐ Function Culture and Recreation 119,790 99,861 1,539,238 1,539,238 480,124 1,059,114 31% 397,748 (82,376) General Fund Payroll Only Expenditures Total 995,785 802,883 12,036,412 12,036,412 3,935,600 8,100,812 33% 3,542,137 (393,463) COMPARATIVEAnnual
City of Prior Lake Expenditures- Payroll and BenefitsAs of 5/31/2022 (Preliminary & Unaudited)Activity for Activity for Variance from VariancePrevious Month Month 2022 2022 2022 Amended Budget ‐ % BDGTActual YTDfrom 20214/30/2022 5/31/2022 Budget Amended Actual YTD Positive (Negative) USED5/31/2021 Positive (Negative)COMPARATIVEAnnualEDA FUNDFunction: Economic Development 46500.00 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 10,783 10,746 143,239 143,239 46,366 96,873 32% 52,153 5,786 EDA Fund Payroll Only Expenditures Total 10,783 10,746 143,239 143,239 46,366 96,873 32% 52,153 5,786 WATER FUNDFunction: Water41520.00 Finance 6,235 6,164 84,371 84,371 28,273 56,098 34% 27,106 (1,167) 49400.00 Water 78,548 62,276 794,320 794,320 311,757 482,563 39% 266,365 (45,393) Water Fund Payroll Only Expenditures Total 84,782 68,440 878,691 878,691 340,030 538,661 39% 293,471 (46,559) SEWER FUNDFunction: Sewer41520.00 Finance 6,234 6,163 84,371 84,371 28,268 56,103 34% 27,103 (1,165) 49450.00 Sewer 50,710 43,786 786,039 786,039 244,018 542,021 31% 269,997 25,979 Sewer Fund Payroll Only Expenditures Total 56,944 49,949 870,410 870,410 272,287 598,123 31% 297,100 24,814 STORM WATER FUNDFunction: Storm Water49420.00 Water Quality 26,641 26,274 356,875 356,875 124,308 232,567 35% 119,943 (4,366) Storm Water Fund Payroll Only Expenditures Total 26,641 26,274 356,875 356,875 124,308 232,567 35% 119,943 (4,366) City‐Wide Total Payroll Expenditures 1,174,935 958,291 14,285,627 14,285,627 4,718,591 9,567,036 33% 4,304,804 (413,787)
Number of Permits Declared Value Number of Permits Declared Value
Single Family Dwellings 8 $3,061,157.00 15 $5,312,310.00
Townhouses (# units) 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
Multiple Units 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
New
Commercial Industrial & Commercial 0 $0.00 1 $284,390.00
Residential 128 $1,981,343.00 126 $1,308,662.78
Industrial & Commercial 1 $30,000.00 4 $97,250.00
Mechanical 74 67 $0.00
Mechanical (SF&TH)32 60 $0.00
TOTALS 243 $5,072,500.00 273 $7,002,612.78
Number of Permits Declared Value Number of Permits Declared Value
Single Family Dwellings 55 $22,105,581.50 66 $25,671,867.00
Townhouses (# units) 0 $0.00 0
Multiple Units 0 $0.00 0 $0.00
New
Commercial Industrial & Commercial 0 $0.00 3 $1,514,256.00
Residential 434 $7,216,262.74 636 $6,457,603.77
Industrial & Commercial 9 $156,132.59 16 $936,725.46
Mechanical 362 $0.00 357 $0.00
Mechanical (SF & TH)220 $0.00 264 $0.00
TOTALS 1080 $29,477,976.83 1342 $34,580,452.23
Summary of Fees Collected MAY 2022 MAY 2021 YTD 2022 YTD 2021
General Fund $75,612.73 $122,094.85 $457,272.02 $549,818.00
Trunk Reserve Fund $13,755.00 $32,300.00 $114,375.00 $130,200.00
Water Storage Fund $0.00 $6,160.00
Water and Sewer Fund $7,800.00 $14,520.00 $44,240.00 $58,160.00
Metro Council SAC $17,395.00 $42,245.00 $124,250.00 $171,465.00
State Surcharge $2,379.79 $3,280.31 $14,138.66 $16,221.95
Builders Fees and Deposits $20,000.00 $40,900.00 $204,000.00 $177,200.00
TOTAL $136,942.52 $255,340.16 $958,275.68 $1,109,224.95
Beverly Cox-Alexander
Beverly Cox-Alexander Development Services Assistant Building Department
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
BUILDING PERMIT SUMMARY
May 1, 2022 - May 31, 2022
New
Residential
MAY 2022 MAY 2021
2022 YEAR TO DATE 2021 YEAR TO DATE
New
Residential
Additions
and
Alterations
Additions
and
Alterations
Mechanical permits include but are not limited to furnaces, water heaters, softeners, and fireplaces. They are flat-rate permit fees.
Mechanical (SF & TH) permits include required plumbing, heating, sewer and water and fireplace permits for new single family residences. They are
flat-rate permit fees.
1
MEMORANDUM of AGREEMENT
Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District and City of Prior Lake
Stormwater Volume Management for Fish Point Road Reconstruction
and Prior Lake Downtown South Roadway Reconstruction Projects
(PLSLWD Permit Nos. 21.01, 22.01)
This Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is entered into by the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed
District, a Minnesota political subdivision with purposes and powers set forth at Minnesota Statutes
chapters 103B and 103D (PLSLWD) and the City of Prior Lake, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Prior
Lake") (together, the "Parties").
A. For the protection of water resources within its boundaries, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
§§103D.341 and 103D.345, the PLSLWD has adopted and implements rules requiring permits for land
disturbing activities. The rules require, among other things, that the permittee provide for and maintain
stormwater volume management practices to prevent impact from increased stormwater volume
resulting from hard surface contruction.
B. Prior Lake has received PLSLWD permits for the Fish Point Road Reconstruction Project (Permit No.
21.01) and the Prior Lake Downtown South Roadway Reconstruction Project (Permit No. 22.01). In each
case, Prior Lake has determined, and the PLSLWD has concurred, that volume management practices
could not feasibly be incorporated into the work, and Prior Lake has assumed the obliigation to provide
such practices independently.
C. On March 1, 2021, the Parties entered into a memorandum of agreement by which Prior Lake
committed to provide volume management practices associated with Permit No. 21.01 ("Fish Point
MOA"). Its outstanding obligation under the Fish Point MOA is to provide 1,905 cubic feet of volume
management. On March 8, 2022, the PLSLWD Board of Managers approved Permit No. 22.01,
conditioned on the Parties' entering into a new, superseding memorandum of agreement by which Prior
Lake would provide for the 1,905 cubic feet of stormwater volume associated with Permit No. 21.01 and
an additional 8,554 cubic feet of stormwater volume associated with Permit No. 22.01. This MOA is for
the purpose of fulfilling this condition of Permit No. 22.01.
WHEREFORE the Parties agree as follows, intending to be legally bound:
1. Within 24 months from the effective date of this MOA, at its cost, Prior Lake will provide for one or
more volume management practices affording a total of 10,459 cubic feet of stormwater volume
management to be substantially complete and functional. Prior Lake will complete the practice or
practices promptly thereafter. The practice or practices will:
a. Capture stormwater within the direct drainage area to Prior Lake-Spring Lake.
b. Provide for stormwater abstraction, or otherwise supply excess volume conforming to the
volume conversion factor set forth in the current PLSLWD stormwater management rule.
2
c. Conform to sound engineering design principles and, specifically, to design and freeboard
requirements set forth in the current PLSLWD stormwater management rule.
d. Be sited so that Prior Lake, by fee interest or easement of record, has perpetual access for
inspection and maintenance staging.
The "current" rule, as used here, means the rule in effect at the time Prior Lake completes the 60
percent design.
2. With respect to each practice, Prior Lake will supply the PLSLWD with the feasibility assessment, 60
percent design and 90 percent design for the review and concurrence of the PLSLWD Administrator at
each stage. Within three months after a practice is substantially complete, Prior Lake will provide to the
PLSLWD record drawings prepared by a professional engineer.
3. Prior Lake will maintain the practice in perpetuity in accordance with the inspection and maintenance
requirements of Prior Lake's NPDES MS4 permit. The PLSLWD may enforce those requirements with
respect to the practice or practices subject to this MOA.
4. Prior Lake may be credited for any volume resulting from the practice or practices installed or
constructed under this MOA that exceeds the volume required by this MOA. The amount to be credited
will be as determined by the PLSLWD on the basis of the submitted record drawings. Credit use will be
as the PLSLWD stormwater rule provides at the time that Prior Lake seeks to use the credit.
5. If Prior Lake has not met its obligation under paragraph 1, above, it will, or at any time before the
indicated deadline it may, in place of that obligation pay into the stormwater impact fund maintained by
the PLSLWD under its stormwater rule, in the amount specified by the schedule in place at the time of
payment.
6. PLSLWD concurrence in the design of a practice under this MOA is solely for the purpose of
determining, in its judgment and discretion, that the practice will allow Prior Lake to meet the
requirements of the PLSLWD rule. In performing this role, the PLSLWD makes no representation or
warranty to Prior Lake or any third party as to the adequacy or fitness of the design. Nothing in this
agreement waives or limits any immunity, defense or liability limit that Prior Lake or the PLSLWD enjoys
as a matter of law, with respect to the other party and any third party.
7. The effective date of this MOA is the date is was signed by the Parties. The MOA terminates when the
PLSLWD has confirmed, in writing, the volume provided by Prior Lake to meet paragraph 1, above, and
any volume credit under paragraph 4, or when Prior Lake has made payment under paragraph 5.
Paragraphs 3, 4 and 6 will survive termination. The Fish Point MOA hereby is superseded and no longer
of effect.
8. The above recitals are incorporated into this MOA, which incorporates and supersedes all prior
negotiations, representations or agreements between the Parties, oral or written, concerning Prior
Lake's obligation to provide volume management practices under Permit Nos. 21.01 and 22.01.
3
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Parties, intending to be legally bound, have caused this Agreement to be
executed by their duly authorized officials.
PRIOR LAKE-SPRING LAKE WATERSHED DISTRICT
Mike Myser, Board President Date
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Kirt Briggs, Mayor Date
TREASURER’S REPORT FUND DESCRIPTIONS
General Fund - Represents the resources to support general operating budget expenditures of the City. The year-
end fund balance represents dollars that have accumulated over a period of time. The City Council has designated
a minimum of 45% of the current operating budget, for working capital to finance city operations.
Water Fund - For the collection of water billing utility revenue. This enterprise fund balance is allocated for the
operational costs of the Water departments and normally reserved for large capital municipal system expenses.
Sewer Fund - For the collection of sewer billing utility revenue. This enterprise fund balance is allocated for the
operational costs of the Sewer department and normally reserved for large capital municipal system expenses.
Water Quality Fund - An enterprise account funded by the storm water charge that is generated on the bi-monthly
water and sewer utility bills. The funds in the account are dedicated to finance water quality improvements
including departmental administration, storm water maintenance operations and improvement projects related to
water quality.
Cable Franchise Fund - Acts as a clearing house for funds received from the cable franchise company as specified
by ordinance.
Capital Park Fund - Dedicated funds received from developers in accordance with the City’s Park Dedication
requirement when land is platted. Funds are collected for the purpose of developing the City’s neighborhood park
and trail system. These dollars are programmed throughout the course of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program.
Police Forfeiture Fund – Special revenue fund created to track criminal and DWI forfeiture revenues and
expenditures.
ED Special Revenue – Reserved and expended at the direction of the Prior Lake Economic Development
Authority for specific economic development activity as allowed by MN Statute. The purpose is to provide
economic incentives for new business expansion within the community.
ED Fed/MN Loan Funds - Accounts for the proceeds of economic development grants received either from the
federal government or the State of Minnesota to provide seed money for a revolving loan account. This provides
economic incentive for new business expansion within the community.
DAG Special Revenue Fund - Special revenue fund related to costs the City incurs in connection with a
subdivision. Fees are paid to the City by the developer when the Development Contract and Final Plat are
approved by City Council. Revenues are used to pay for legal expenses incurred with review and approval of the
plat and inspection services on developer installed-utilities for newly approved subdivisions within Prior Lake.
Federal ARPA Fiscal Recovery Fund – Special revenue fund created to track American Rescue Plan Act funds
received by the City.
Water Revenue Bond Fund – PW Bldg - Debt service fund to pay bonds issued to construct the public works
maintenance building. The capital facility charge generated on the utility bill provides the funding for the bond
payments which occur semi-annually. Funds are transferred from Sewer and Water Fund.
Water Revenue Bond Fund – WT Plant - Debt service fund to pay bonds issued to construct the water treatment
plant. Revenue from the utility bills provides the funding for the bond payments which occur semi-annually.
Funds are transferred from Sewer and Water Fund.
Tax Increment Funds - Represents an accumulation of funds such as bond proceeds and project administration
fees charged to companies requesting project write-downs in the form of tax increment financing for new and/or
redevelopment. The TIF district property taxes are then deposited in a number of tax increment funds established
to track their respective revenue.
Revolving Equipment Fund - A regular replacement schedule for equipment needs of the City in excess of $5,000
has been adopted. Periodic fund transfers are appropriated to provide a funding source for the acquisition and
purchase of new and replacement vehicles and equipment.
Revolving Park Equipment Fund – Consists of funds reserved for the replacement of park equipment.
Facilities Management Fund – Established in conjunction with the Facilities Management Plan (FMP). The FMP
provides a schedule of major repairs, replacements and upgrades to all of the City facilities.
Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund – Consists of funds available for annual street mill and overlay projects
with any remaining funds to be used to provide upfront funding for future improvements.
Construction Fund - Represent unexpended bond proceeds that are reserved to pay for improvement projects
approved by the City Council on an annual basis. These dollars are necessary to complete outstanding
construction contracts and related engineering and professional services.
Street Oversize Fund - Consists of dedicated revenue generated by fees associated with new development and
new construction building permits for the funding of pedestrian related improvements i.e., bikeways, sidewalks,
trails plus right of way acquisition along collector streets and occasional collector street links.
Trunk Reserve Fund - Consists of dedicated revenue generated from utility connection permits and acreage fees
assessed at time of sewer and water installation for the recovering of trunk oversizing costs and central municipal
system improvements i.e., wells lift stations, force mains, etc. These dollars are programmed throughout the
course of the City’s capital improvement plan.
Water Storage Fund - Accounts for the water tower fee that is charged and collected on building permits. This
fund balance is 100% reserved for the construction of elevated and ground water storage facilities.
Debt Service Funds - Represents prepayments of special assessments, property tax collections and special levies
needed to pay the outstanding bonded indebtedness of the City. This fund balance is 100% reserved for the
payment of bond principal and interest.
Agency Fund - Accounts for the residential building permit deposit that is refunded to the building contractor
upon final inspection. This provides financial assurance that the property site will be adequately cleaned up and
debris free before an occupancy permit is granted.
Severance Compensation Fund – Internal Service Fund established to partially fund the City’s compensated
absence liability associated with the accrued vacation and sick leave for employees upon termination as
recommended by the State Auditor’s Office.
Insurance Fund – Internal Service Fund established to track revenues and expenditures related to insurance funds.
City of Prior Lake
Treasurers Report
May 2022
Fund 5/1/2022 5/31/2022
Fund Type & Name No. Balance Receipts Disbursements Balance
Business-Type Funds
Water Fund 601 6,272,857.51$ 95,609.49$ 254,614.62$ 6,113,852.38$
Sewer Fund 604 3,730,115.33 54,254.20 244,285.14 3,540,084.39
Water Quality Fund 602 2,136,135.93 17,108.10 58,906.04 2,094,337.99
Total Business-Type Funds 12,139,108.77$ 166,971.79$ 557,805.80$ 11,748,274.76$
Governmental-Type Funds
General Fund 101 8,029,101.10$ 307,677.71$ 1,096,136.30$ 7,240,642.51$
Special Revenue Funds
Cable Franchise Fund 210 119,193.90$ 228.26$ 55.43$ 119,366.73$
Capital Park Fund 225 1,636,860.52 4,830.43 4,673.58 1,637,017.37
Police Forfeiture Fund 235 151,068.04 289.44 - 151,357.48
EDA Special Revenue 240 17,568.60 4,118.67 10,876.27 10,811.00
Econ Dev Federal Revolving Loan Fund 250 134,054.85 256.84 - 134,311.69
Econ Dev MN Revolving Loan Fund 255 - - - -
Developer Agreement Fund 260 1,379,954.48 1,316.00 8,854.00 1,372,416.48
Federal ARPA Fiscal Recovery Fund 265 1,489,069.08 697.71 - 1,489,766.79
Total Special Revenue Funds 4,927,769.47$ 11,737.35$ 24,459.28$ 4,915,047.54$
Capital Project Funds
Tax Increment 402 -$ -$ -$ -$
TIF #1-3 413 117,897.69 225.88 - 118,123.57
TIF #3-1 414 352,466.72 675.30 - 353,142.02
TIF #5-1 416 11,438.45 21.92 - 11,460.37
TIF #6-1 417 469,089.63 898.75 - 469,988.38
TIF #1-4 418 - - - -
TIF #1-5 419 36,419.57 69.78 - 36,489.35
Revolving Equipment Fund 410 831,529.93 34,773.88 18,683.45 847,620.36
Revolving Park Equipment Fund 430 1,157,069.73 2,204.08 6,676.91 1,152,596.90
Facilities Management Fund 440 1,310,814.78 9,273.94 6,762.50 1,313,326.22
Permanent Impr Revolving Fund 450 463,024.88 112,070.34 - 575,095.22
Construction Fund 501 1,991,101.62 2,940.05 525,969.37 1,468,072.30
Trunk Reserve Fund 502 5,378,750.65 25,555.54 - 5,404,306.19
Street Oversize Fund 503 1,424,772.99 2,729.78 - 1,427,502.77
Water Storage Fund 505 - - - -
Total Capital Project Funds 13,544,376.64$ 191,439.24$ 558,092.23$ 13,177,723.65$
Debt Service Funds
314-351 &
549-573 $ 2,565,692.13 19,523.75$ -$ 2,585,215.88$
Agency Fund 801 764,575.00$ 20,000.00$ -$ 784,575.00$
Total Governmental Type Funds 29,831,514.34$ 550,378.05$ 1,678,687.81$ 28,703,204.58$
Internal Service Funds 7xx 654,896.71$ 4,669.37$ -$ 659,566.08$
Total All Funds 42,625,519.82$ 722,019.21$ 2,236,493.61$ 41,111,045.42$
Investment Pool & Ratio as of 5/31/2022 99.47% 40,894,182.59$
This report does not reflect financial obligations from contracts, agreements, purchases, services received, etc.
City of Prior Lake
Treasurers Report
May 2022
Fund Type & Name Fund Balance Classification Constraints
Business-Type Funds
Water Fund Unrestricted Identified on utility bill for this purpose
Sewer Fund Unrestricted Identified on utility bill for this purpose
Water Quality Fund Unrestricted Identified on utility bill for this purpose
Governmental-Type Funds
General Fund Unassigned Cash flow, emergencies, one-time opportunities
Special Revenue Funds
Cable Franchise Fund Assigned for communications Statutory obligation to use for PEG access
Capital Park Fund Assigned for capital improvements Contractually obligated; park dedication fees
EDA Special Revenue Assigned for development Economic Development
Econ Dev Federal Revolving Loan Fund Restricted for economic development Economic Development
Econ Dev MN Revolving Loan Fund Restricted for economic development Economic Development
Developer Agreement Fund Assigned for development Contractually obligated;
Federal ARPA Recovery Funds Restricted for equipment and improvements Contractually obligated
Capital Project Funds
Tax Increment Restricted for tax increment Contractually obligated by tax increment agreements
TIF #1-3 Restricted for tax increment Contractually obligated by tax increment agreements
TIF #1-4 Restricted for tax increment Contractually obligated by tax increment agreements
TIF #3-1 Restricted for tax increment Contractually obligated by tax increment agreements
TIF #4-1 Restricted for tax increment Contractually obligated by tax increment agreements
TIF #5-1 Restricted for tax increment Contractually obligated by tax increment agreements
TIF #6-1 Restricted for tax increment Contractually obligated by tax increment agreements
Revolving Equipment Fund Assigned for capital improvements Identified for equipment replacement
Revolving Park Equipment Fund Assigned for capital improvements Identified for park equipment replacement
Facilities Management Fund Assigned for capital improvements Identified for funding Facilities Management Plan
Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund Assigned for capital improvements Identified for funding street improvement projects
Construction Fund Restricted for capital improvements Construction projects in progress
Trunk Reserve Fund Assigned for capital improvements Contractually obligated by developer agreements
Street Oversize Fund Assigned for capital improvements Contractually obligated by developer agreements
Water Storage Fund Assigned for capital improvements Contractually obligated by developer agreements
Debt Service Funds Restricted for Debt Service Reserved for contractually obligated debt service
Agency Fund N/A Escrows to be reimbursed to depositors
Internal Service Funds Unrestricted Identified as payment for severance compensation and insurance
Prepared by:
Midwest Natural Resources, Inc.
1032 West 7th Street, Suite 150
St. Paul, Minnesota 55102
www.mnrinc.us
Prepared for:
D.R. Horton
20860 Kenbridge Court #100
Lakeville, MN 55044
WETLAND PERMIT APPLICATION
SPRING LAKE RIDGE – PRIOR LAKE, MN
MAY 9, 2022
Project Name: Spring Lake Ridge, Prior Lake, MN
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: D.R. Horton Contact: Mike Suel
Mailing Address: 20860 Kenbridge Court #100, Lakeville, MN 55044
Phone: 952‐985‐7823
E‐mail Address: msuel@drhorton.com
Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above):
Mailing Address:
Phone:
E‐mail Address:
Agent Name: Ken Arndt, Midwest Natural Resources, Inc.
Mailing Address: 1032 W. 7
th St. Suite 150, St. Paul, MN 55102
Phone: 651‐788‐0641
E‐mail Address: ken.arndt@mnrinc.us
PART TWO: Site Location Information
County: Scott City/Township:Prior Lake
Parcel ID and/or Address: PIDs 259080011, 259080021, & 259080022
Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): Section 8, T114N, R22W
Lat/Long (decimal degrees):
Attach a map showing the location of the site in relation to local streets, roads, highways.
(See Figure 1 of attached wetland permit application)
Approximate size of site (acres) or if a linear project, length (feet):appx. 84 acres
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.
MN Wetland Conservation Act Notice of Decision by the City of Prior Lake dated June 28th, 2019
ACOE Regulatory File No. MVP‐2019‐00939‐JTB Letter dated August 7th, 2019 – Wetland Concurrence Letter
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.
The site is proposed to be developed with a single‐family residential development and associated infrastructure.
Project Name: Spring Lake Ridge, Prior Lake, MN
PART FOUR: Aquatic Resource Impact1 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.
Aquatic
Resource ID (as
noted on
overhead view)
Aquatic Resource
Type (wetland,
lake, tributary
etc.)
Type of Impact
(fill, excavate,
drain, or
remove
vegetation)
Duration of
Impact
Permanent
(P) or
Temporary
(T)1
Size of Impact2
Overall
Size of
Aquatic
Resource
3
Existing Plant
Community
Type(s) in
Impact Area4
County, Major
Watershed #, and
Bank Service Area
# of Impact Area5
Wetland 2 wetland fill P
5,152 sq. ft.
(0.1182 ac.) N/A Type 2 Fresh
Wet Meadow Scott, 33, 9
Watercourse
within
Wetland 2
watercourse excavate P 145 LF N/A intermittent Scott, 33, 9
Wetland 5
(off‐site) wetland excavate T
6,526 sq. ft.
(0.1498 ac.) N/A Type 4 Deep
Marsh Scott, 33, 9
1If 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)”.
2Impacts 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”.
4Use Wetland Plants and Plant Community Types of Minnesota and Wisconsin 3rd 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 associated with each:
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 to indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement.
Project Name: Spring Lake Ridge, Prior Lake, MN
Attachment B
Supporting Information for Applications Involving Exemptions, No Loss
Determinations, and Activities Not Requiring Mitigation
Complete this part if you maintain that the identified aquatic resource impacts in Part Four do not require wetland
replacement/compensatory mitigation OR if you are seeking verification that the proposed water resource impacts are either
exempt from replacement or are not under CWA/WCA jurisdiction.
Identify the specific exemption or no‐loss provision for which you believe your project or site qualifies:
8420.04120 Exemption Standards
Provide a detailed explanation of how your project or site qualifies for the above. Be specific and provide and refer to attachments
and exhibits that support your contention. Applicants should refer to rules (e.g. WCA rules), guidance documents (e.g. BWSR
guidance, Corps guidance letters/public notices), and permit conditions (e.g. Corps General Permit conditions) to determine the
necessary information to support the application. Applicants are strongly encouraged to contact the WCA LGU and Corps Project
Manager prior to submitting an application if they are unsure of what type of information to provide:
Under 8420.0420 Exemption Standards Subp. 6. Utilities, it states that a replacement plan is not required for impacts
resulting from: (1) the installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of utility lines, including pipelines if: (a) the
impacts have been avoided and minimized to the extent possible; and (b) the proposed project significantly modifies or
alters less than one‐half acre of wetlands. The temporary impact associated with Wetland 5 will involve the construction
of the trunk sewer line for the proposed development within a narrow stretch of the eastern side of Wetland 5 that is
0.1498 ac. in area . Efforts were made to minimize this impact by installing the sewer line as close to the roadway (Sunset
Ave.) as possible rather than constructing it all within the open water part of the wetland.
Since the impact for Wetland 5 was avoided and minimized to the degree possible and the impact is well below 0.5 acre,
this exemption request should be approved. The applicant is requesting an exemption decision from the LGU for the
temporary impact to Wetland 5. Following the construction of the truck sewer, the impacted area will be regraded and
seeded with an appropriate mix that includes species of native grasses and forbs that currently are well established within
this area.
Project Name: Spring Lake Ridge, Prior Lake, MN
Attachment C
Avoidance and Minimization
and Additional Information
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:
D.R. Horton is proposing a new residential development in the City of Prior Lake. This proposed development is
located south of C.S.A.H. 17 (Marschall Rd) in the southwestern part of the city (Figure 1). The Spring Lake Ridge
development will include 99 single‐family lots with associated public roads, site amenities, and storm water ponding.
The site itself covers approximately 84 acres of land that consists of an existing residence, areas of maintained turf
grass, agricultural land in row crop production, deciduous woodlands, and several wetland areas (Figure 2). Access
for the site is planned via one roadway, Sunset Avenue, which will continue through the development to the south
where it will be stubbed for future expansion at the property boundary. The project‘s construction will consist of
site grading for infrastructure including: roads, utilities, four storm water facilities, an infiltration basin area, and
building pad areas. Construction is expected to begin in 2022 and will continue until fully built. Project plans that
include the existing conditions and grading plans for the proposed development are included in Appendices A and
B.
The need for this project is based on the expanding residential housing market in the City of Prior Lake as well as
availability to public infrastructure. Expected housing market growth in this part of Prior Lake will be met with new
residential development including the proposed Spring Lake Ridge development. Current land use classification for
the site is Residential, Urban Low Density (0‐4 U/AC).
Existing Wetland Resources On‐Site
Wetlands within the proposed residential development were delineated and documented in a report submitted by
Anderson Engineering on May 1st, 2019 (Appendix D). The wetlands were reviewed by the LGU (City of Prior Lake’s
wetland consultant WSB) and the Technical Evaluation Panel with a Notice of Decision being issued on June 28th,
2019 (Appendix E). Three wetlands were delineated within the site and are designated as Wetlands 1, 2, and 3. The
following is a description of Wetlands 2 and 5, the two wetlands proposed to be permanently and temporarily
impacted for the project.
Wetland 2
Wetland 2 is a Type 1/2/3/4/6 (PEM1A/B/C/F/PSS1A/PFO1A; Seasonally Flooded Basin/Floodplain Forest/Fresh Wet
Meadow/Shallow Marsh/Deep Marsh/Shrub‐Carr) wetland complex located in the southern half of the site and is
approximately 12.65 acres in area within the site boundary. This wetland extends off‐site to the southwest and is
part of DNR Protected Waters 70‐54 P (Spring Lake). Wetland 2 is part of a large wetland complex that is associated
with Spring Lake.
One wetland impact (5,152 sq. ft./0.1182 ac.) is being proposed directly to a fresh wet meadow part of Wetland 2
that involves permanently filling a small part of this wetland (Appendix C). This impact will be the result of grading
associated with the construction of Sunset Avenue in this part of the proposed development.
Wetland 2 Impact Area
Wetland 5
Wetland 5 is a Type 4 (PUBF; Deep Marsh) wetland located in the northern part of the project area and is
approximately 1.64 acre in area. The perimeter of this basin is dominated almost entirely by narrow leaf cattail
(Typha angustifolia) that transitions to upland where switch grass (Panicum virgatum) and a few other grasses and
forbs have established. Wetland 5 is part of the Spring Lake Wetland Project that was created sometime between
2013 and 2015.
One wetland impact (6,526 sq. ft./0.1498 ac.) is being proposed directly to Wetland 5 that involves temporarily
impacting the eastern side of this wetland along Sunset Avenue (Appendix C). This impact will be the result of
installing the trunk sewer for the development. Following construction in the area of temporary wetland impact, the
wetland will be restored to pre‐construction elevations and will be seeded with an appropriate seed mix for the type
of wetland plant community being impacted.
Wetland 5 Impact Area
Photo Left: Wetland 2 impact
area where a field access road
crosses the wetland and
watercourse. Vegetation in the
impact area consist of mainly reed
canary grass and little else. The
linear watercourse will be
directed through a culvert once
the road is constructed in this part
of the development.
Photo Left: Wetland 5 impact
area where a temporary impact
will take place. Narrow fringe of
cattail along open water that
transitions to upland dominated
primarily by switch grass.
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 are encouraged
to attach drawings and plans to support their analysis:
In general, a total avoidance alternative would result in the failure to meet the demand for this type of residential
development in the City of Prior Lake by reducing or eliminating the overall usability and accessibility of the site. The
reduction or elimination of this type of residential development of the site would be in conflict with the current land
use classification of low density residential. As less land is available within the city to build this type of development,
the ability to avoid Wetland 2 became difficult when faced with constructing Sunset Avenue through the site in order
to utilize the buildable land south of Wetland 2 and to provide a roadway connection at the southern extent of the
site for future development.
Wetland 2 Total Wetland Avoidance Build Alternative
Due to the location of Wetland 2 within the Spring Lake Ridge s ite as well as the proposed grading for Sunset Avenue
and the 5’ sidewalk along the north/west side of this street, a total wetland avoidance alternative was not possible.
In order for Sunset Avenue and the 5’ sidewalk to be built to city standards and cross Wetland 2, it will result in
impacting a small area of Wetland 2.
An avoidance scenario that was considered to avoid all impacts to this wetland area involved terminating Sunset
Avenue to the north of Wetland 2 with a cul‐de‐sac. This avoidance alternative may avoid the direct impact to
Wetland 2 but it would not be allowed by the City. The City requires streets that terminate with a cul‐de‐sac be no
longer than 600 LF in length. If this road were to terminate at a cul‐de‐sac it would be approximately 1,800 LF in
length which would exceed the City’s maximum length of 600 LF by 1,200 LF. The City also is planning for Sunset
Avenue to be built through the site to provide a future roadway connection to properties south of Spring Lake Ridge
that may be annexed into the City sometime in the future.
No Action Alternative:
The no action alternative would result in a failure to meet the purpose and need of the proposed project. The
applicant considers this alternative infeasible since the land use in this part of Prior Lake is zoned PUD and is guided
for low density residential and would not be reasonable for the investment‐backed expectations of the applicant or
meeting the demand for this type of single‐family residential housing in the City of Prior Lake. Therefore, the no
action alternative is not a viable consideration.
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 8420.0520 Subp. 4):
The Applicant has considered minimizing wetland impacts to the degree possible, given the constraints posed by the
location of Wetland 2 in regards to the proposed location of Sunset Avenue. Efforts were made to minimize wetland
impacts to the degree possible and involved selecting the narrowest crossing of Wetland 2 and grading the side
slopes of the new roadway with the steepest allowable 3:1 slope.
Sunset Avenue will be aligned in such a way as to minimize wetland impact to Wetland 2. If the roadway were located
further to the west or east, it would end up impacting more of Wetland 2 than what is currently being proposed.
Sunset Avenue is the main roadway within the development and is a critical component of being able to develop the
southwestern part of the site. Use of 3:1 slope along the roadway will minimize wetland impact to Wetland 2 when
compared to grading the side slopes with less steep slopes like 4:1 or 5:1.
Additional Information
Tree Removal
There will be approximately 0.07 acre of tree removal associated with this project within wetland areas to be
impacted.
BMP’s.
Wetland areas not being impacted will be protected by erosion control fence during the construction phase of the
development. All disturbed areas will be seeded and mulched. Slopes over 3:1 will be seeded and blanketed.
Other Permits or Approvals Required: MPCA General Stormwater Permit
MPCA Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
City of Prior Lake ‐ Final Plat Approval
City of Prior Lake Grading Permit
Scott County Public Works‐ Entrance Permit
Proposed Wetland Mitigation
Wetland mitigation being proposed for permanently impacting parts of Wetland 2 will involve the purchase of a total
of 10,304 sq. ft. (0.2365 ac.) of Type 2 (fresh wet meadow) wetland credit from wetland bank #1682, which is located
in Scott County. This wetland bank is located within the same Major Watershed (Minnesota (Shakopee) – 33) and Bank
Service Area (9) as the subject property. This action should satisfy any mitigation requirements for the one wetland
area being permanently impacted within the proposed development.
Project Name: Spring Lake Ridge, Prior Lake, MN
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
Account # County Major
Watershed #
Bank
Service
Area #
Credit Type
(if applicable) Number of Credits
1682 Scott 33‐Minnesota
River
(Shakopee)
9 SWC 10,304 sq. ft.
(0.2365 ac.)
Applicants should attach documentation indicating that they have contacted the wetland bank account owner and reached at 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 mitigation plan is
approved by the Corps and LGU.
Currently no wetland banking credits are available within the same minor watershed (from Spring Lake‐33129) as
the proposed project area. Several wetland banks are located in the same major watershed (Minnesota River
(Shakopee), 33).
Bank #1682, which is located in the same major watershed and bank service area as the site, will be able to provide
all of the needed wetland credit for this project. The applicant is proposing to purchase the needed wetland banking
credits from this wetland bank in order to satisfy the mitigation requirements associated with the proposed
residential development project.
Contact has been made with the manager of wetland bank #1682 in May of 2022 to discuss credit availability for the
purchase of needed wetland credit for the project. Based on the amount of wetland banking credit required for the
mitigation associated with this project, wetland bank #1682 will be able to provide the total amount of wetland
credit needed.
A purchase agreement with wetland bank will be drafted during the comment period of this permit and executed
following final approval of this permit application by the LGU and the Army Corps of Engineers in order to secure the
needed wetland banking credits for this project.
Applicant or Representative:
Ken Arndt Title: Wetland Specialist
Signature:
Date: 5‐9‐22
Jackson Jackson
Louisville
Sand Creek
Spring Lake
Shakopee
Shakopee
PriorLake
P o i n t eHalli
Belmont
SouthShoreMarschall170th
Q u in c yMa
r
c
i
a
DuluthGrainwoodW i n f i e l d165thSakpe
L o rd s
BobcatFox Tail
FremontOrionWi
l
dsWind Song
Valley View
W ild s
Tintaocanku
Pike Lake140thWedgewoodDakotaSunsetN o r t o n
G lyn w aterNorthwoodMcKennaD
a
k
ota
h FoothillMartindaleFountainHills
200th
160th
R u stic H illHeronW
ilds
185th
Ridge
BuckLakeWildsP
r
airie
g
r
a
s
s
MushtownC e d a rTownlineH illsideTownlineRaymond WildernessW i l d s
R
ed
w
in
g
Sioux
TerraceV illageL akeLyonsFairlawnLangfordBa
r
r
i
ng
t
onPleasant RidgemontToronto2 1 s t
BlindLake
SunrayEmbassyC o u g a rTwinIslandTyrolVista RidgeBerensHarlowDewitte203rd
T u r n e r
Ha
rlo
w MarshWalnut180thDrakeMolina
G re e n H e ig h ts
Wacipi
Oak
W i l l o w w o o d 13MnioweGol
denVi
ewSunsetWildwoodSycamore145th
Peace
Panama13Chanzi
RidgeJacksonW estW oodlandIdaCarriageJansenT r a i l O f
D r e a m s
QuakerFoxTail B each
Sunray
Fairhaven
Teal
L
a
n
d
auOmega
P e r s h in g
LonePineCrane
FishPointJenniferEncl
aveLimeF o u n tain
H illsH id d e n
P o n d
EvanstonTinta
WoodDuck
JacksonDominion
Mystic LakeDakota
LakesideWestShepherdsK e s t re l
WildsView
Lim erickFoxRun
ValeHighlandOld Brick Yard203r d TintaMysticLakeHickory
S p rin g
L a k e Eagle CreekGriggsS k i n n e r
M e c h t e l
R i d g e
Pa r k
R
olling O
aks
SpruceHaasLakeHope
Adrian
Woodland157th 7916 1 s t
LangfordM a r s c h a llD
a
k
ota
h
42
195th
T yro lMap le
WildsRidge
Bluebird204th
133rd
S
ha
dy
Co
v
ePo
i
nt
154th MeadowlawnSunr
i
seMapleTiwahe
ShorelineTahinkaEagl
ewoodSakpePanamaM axineCoachman2 1 3 t h
M a l l a r d
PineViewWakpa
NewportWilds
Ridge
154th
Horizon
180thZumbro
Erin182n d RavenTower
179th
P a h a
McKennaBrenner
FranklinRosew oodJeffersEagleCreek170th
1 5 4 th
HarlowC a r r i a g e H i l l s
Colorado
L
a
k
e
v
i
e
wLinkZu mbro
OelkeBridgeCrossingMar
s
chal
l
CondonsMcKay174th
H eritageDovePinOak
Rut le d ge
Hi
ckoryR o b i n
1 7 0 t h
186th 13H
ah
n
78
202ndHickory
O'Brien
Buck Lake
CreditRiver
Marsh
B e a c h
HarlowL i l a
165th Sky
li
ne
Rice160th
BlakeArctic21190th
Bluebill
AddisonL
e
v
i
Spring Lake
WellsMysticLake199th Jeffers145th
XeonParkwood
165th
AddisonJ
a
s
p
e
r
No rthBerens
M e a d ow
ShorelineHahnW
hitetail
Fairlawn
215th Mystic LakeStonebrookeC
edar
H
illsKoeperMarschall
HowardLake
CalmorM artin d ale170thAutumn
DairyBrewerHawkRidge182nd ParkNicolletBaseline210th
189th HadleyL a k eView
PandoraLancer
17 4 t h
South Sutton Lake ChateauChestnut
Westri
dge165th
N
orth Sutton Lake ManitouS h o r e lin e
B
lu
e
bir
d
WillowBeachJ
o
c
k
o
190thMystic LakeRedwingBreezyPointMysticLake140th
20 7 thFoxRidgeStonebrooke
205thPondviewStarviewLangfordLuedke
2 0 6 t hMarschall
A v a l o n
208th
I s la n dView
2 0 7 th
150th
78
H
oward
Lake
YorkshireL ittleC ro w
MarystownPeninsulaPoint
LangfordLangfordB u t t e r f l y
LangfordHalifax140th
19 5 t h
MalibuVergus205th
CountrySquiresOld Brick Yard130th
LakeRidge21KopCo untryPribyl Pond213thParkfield210th
T heis14
H ic k o ry H ills
Langford
Zumbro200th79
RedwingSite LocationD.R. Hor tonSpring Lake RidgePrior Lake, MN
Figure 1
´Project Area (appx. 84 ac.)
Municipal Boundar y
St reet C enterlines
Photo Source: 2020 color 7-county
0 0.5 1Miles
912.94Spring Lake70005400
1
2
IA-A
Wetland 2Type 1/2/3/4/6PEM1F/C/B/A/PSS1A/PFO1ASeasonally Flooded Basin/Floodplain Forest/Fresh (Wet) Meadow/Shallow Marsh/Deep Marsh/Shrub Swamp12.65 Ac.
Wetland 1Type 1PFO1AFloodplain Forest1.09 Ac.
Ä
ÄÄ
Ä
2
AB
IA-B
Wetland 3Type 3PEM1CShallow Marsh0.12 Ac.3
A
B
C D
BA
E
F
G
IJ
H
Legend
Project ExtentScott Co. ParcelsWetland Field Delineated4/16/2019-4/24/2019Sample PointCulvertChannelOrdinary High Water
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 4.24.2019
IScale:1 inch = 400 feet
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 5Wetland Delineation
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
Appendix A
Existing Conditions
(Pioneer Engineering, P.A.)
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD-EXCON
2.10EXISTING CONDITIONS
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD-EXCON
2.11EXISTING CONDITIONS
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
Appendix B
Grading Plan
(Pioneer Engineering, P.A.)
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD-OVERALL
3.10OVERALL GRADING PLAN
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
SHEET INDEX
SETBACKS
FRONT 25'
SIDE 7.5'
CORNER 20'
REAR 25'
MIN. WETLAND BUFFER 20'
MIN. NO GRADE ZONE 10'
LOW FLOOR 3' + OHW
2' + HWL
LOW OPENING 2' + EOF
FILTRATION ELEV 3' + SHWT
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD
3.20GRADING PLAN
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
SETBACKS
FRONT 25'
SIDE 7.5'
CORNER 20'
REAR 25'
MIN. WETLAND BUFFER 20'
MIN. NO GRADE ZONE 10'
LOW FLOOR 3' + OHW
2' + HWL
LOW OPENING 2' + EOF
FILTRATION ELEV 3' + SHWT
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD
3.21GRADING PLAN
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
SETBACKS
FRONT 25'
SIDE 7.5'
CORNER 20'
REAR 25'
MIN. WETLAND BUFFER 20'
MIN. NO GRADE ZONE 10'
LOW FLOOR 3' + OHW
2' + HWL
LOW OPENING 2' + EOF
FILTRATION ELEV 3' + SHWT
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD
3.22GRADING PLAN
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
SETBACKS
FRONT 25'
SIDE 7.5'
CORNER 20'
REAR 25'
MIN. WETLAND BUFFER 20'
MIN. NO GRADE ZONE 10'
LOW FLOOR 3' + OHW
2' + HWL
LOW OPENING 2' + EOF
FILTRATION ELEV 3' + SHWT
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD
3.23GRADING PLAN
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
SETBACKS
FRONT 25'
SIDE 7.5'
CORNER 20'
REAR 25'
MIN. WETLAND BUFFER 20'
MIN. NO GRADE ZONE 10'
LOW FLOOR 3' + OHW
2' + HWL
LOW OPENING 2' + EOF
FILTRATION ELEV 3' + SHWT
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD
3.24GRADING PLAN
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions
1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
Appendix C
Wetland Impact & Buffer Plan
(Pioneer Engineering, P.A.)
PERMANENT IMPACTS
TEMPORARY IMPACTS
01-ENG-122009-SHEET-GRAD-WETL
6.10 WETLAND IMPACT & BUFFER PLAN
I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer
under the laws of the State of Minnesota
c
37OFSPRING LAKE RIDGE
PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA
D.R. HORTON
20860 KENBRIDGE COURT, SUITE 100
3-21-2022
NAP
MSN
Name
Reg. No.Date
Revisions1. 4-14-22 Temporary Wetland Impact Date
Designed
Drawn
2019 Pioneer Engineering, P.A.
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914
Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS
47504 3-21-2022
Brian N. Molinaro
LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55044
Appendix D
Wetland Delineation Report
(Anderson Engineering, dated 5-1-19)
13605 1st Avenue North #100, Plymouth, MN 55441
P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090
ae-mn.com
WINKLER LAND CO., LLC
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
MARSCHALL ROAD,
SPRING LAKE TWP, MINNESOTA
May 1st, 2019
AE JOB NO. 15330
TABLE OF CONTENTS
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTACT INFORMATION ...............................................................................................................................2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................3
BACKGROUND ...............................................................................................................................................4
METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................................................4
RESOURCE REVIEW ........................................................................................................................................5
FIELD REVIEW ................................................................................................................................................7
CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................9
APPENDICES
Appendix A FIGURES
Appendix B ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD DATASHEETS
Appendix C SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Appendix D ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION RECORD
Appendix E MINNESOTA ROUTINE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY (MnRAM)
Appendix F CREDENTIALS
CONTACT INFORMATION
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 2
CONTACT INFORMATION
PREPARED FOR:
Bart Winkler
Winkler Land Company, LLC
10519 165th Street West,
Lakeville, MN 55044
PREPARED BY:
Ben Hodapp
Environmental Services Manager
Certified MN Wetland Delineator #1016
Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC
13605 1st Avenue North
Suite 100
Plymouth, MN 55441
Phone: (763) 412-4000
Fax: (763) 412-4090
bhodapp@ae-mn.com
Website: www.ae-mn.com
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Anderson Engineering of MN, LLC was retained to provide professional wetland services using the 1987 United
States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y -87-1; January 1987) and all
supplemental guidance documents to identify areas meeting wetland criteria within the property west of Spring
Lake (PID: 259080010), Spring Lake Township, Scott County, Minnesota. The parcel is in Section 8, Township 114
North, Range 22 West.
Three wetlands or portions thereof were identified and delineated within the investigation area as depicted in
Appendix A, Figure 5. Wetland 1 is a PFO1A, Type 1, floodplain forest. Wetland 2 is a PEM1F/C/B/A/PSS1A/PFO1A,
Type 1/2/3/4/6, seasonally flooded basin/floodplain forest/fresh wet meadow/shallow marsh/ deep marsh/ shrub
swamp. Wetland 3 is a PEM1C, Type 3, shallow marsh.
BACKGROUND & METHODOLOGY
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 4
BACKGROUND
As requested by Winkler Land Company, LLC, Anderson Engineering of MN, LLC completed a wetland investigation
at the property located west of Spring Lake (PID: 259080010), Spring Lake Township, Scott County, Minnesota
(Appendix A, Figure 1).
The site is in Section 8, Township 114 North, Range 22 West. The wetland delineation was completed in
accordance with the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the published
regional supplement to the Army Corps Wetland Delineation Manual, Midwest Region.
The purpose of this study was to identify areas meeting the technical criteria for wetlands, delineate the
jurisdictional extent of the wetland basins, and classify the wetland habitats within the investigation area.
Fieldwork for this site investigation was completed by Environmental Associates, Alex Yellick and Katie Ring, on
April 16th and April 24th, 2019. GIS work for the site investigation was completed by GIS Specialist, Joe Aden. The
weather was sunny and approximately 60 degrees Fahrenheit on both days.
METHODOLOGY
U.S. Geologic Service 7.5” Topographic Quadrangle maps, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland
Inventory maps, U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey and available
aerial photographs were consulted to initially locate potential wetland habitats.
Routine On-site Determination Method was used during this investigation. In this method, the following
procedures were used:
1. The vegetative community was sampled in all present strata to determine whether it met hydrophytic
vegetation criteria based on the indicators identified in the Midwest Regional Supplement.
2. Soil pits were dug using a Dutch auger to depths of sixteen to thirty-six inches. The soil profile was noted
in addition to any hydric soil characteristics.
3. Signs of wetland hydrology were noted and compared to field criteria such as depth to shallow water
table and depth of soil saturation found in the soil pits.
Data from sample points were recorded on Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Wetland Determination Data
Forms (Appendix B). At least one sample point transect crosses the delineated wetland edge. This transect consists
of an upland sample point and a wetland sample point. Other sample points may be in areas which have one or
more other the wetland vegetation, soils, or hydrologic characteristics present; where questionable conditions
exist; or to verify the absence of wetland criteria. Photographs are also taken at each sample point and of the
wetland and upland buffer (Appendix C).
Sample points were marked in the field with orange flags. The identified wetland boundary was marked with
sequentially numbered pink flags. All sample points and the delineated wetland boundary were located using a
Trimble Geo XH sub-meter GPS unit.
RESOURCE REVIEW
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 5
RESOURCE REVIEW
The following resources were reviewed to supplement the wetland field delineation:
NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY:
The National Wetlands Inventory (Appendix A, Figure 2) identifies three PEM1A Type 1, seasonally flooded basins
and one PEM1C/A, Type 1/3, seasonally flooded basin/shallow marsh within the project extent.
USDA – NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE SOIL SURVEY:
Soil survey data for Scott County, MN was obtained and reviewed prior to the delineation. Table 1 provides a list
of the mapped soils within the investigation area. Figure 3 in Appendix A is a map of the soil units with percent
hydric components.
Table 1. Summary of Mapped Soil Units within the Investigation area
MAP UNIT SYMBOL MAP UNIT NAME HYDRIC STATUS HYDRIC RATING DRAINAGE CLASS SITE COVERAGE
LcC Lester loam,
6-10% slopes Non-hydric 5% Well drained 11.4%
LcB Lester loam,
2-6% slopes Non-hydric 10% Well drained 10.0%
Ma Marsh Hydric 1.4% Very poorly
drained 1.5%
LdE3 Lester soils,
18-25% slopes Non-hydric 5% Well drained 1.1%
PbA Houghton
muck, 0-1% slopes Hydric 100% Very poorly
drained 13.9%
Wc
Webster-Le
Sueur silty clay
loams
Hydric 70% Poorly Drained 11.8%
Ga
Glencoe silty
clay loam, 0-1%
slopes
Hydric 100% Very poorly
drained 21.0%
LcB2
Lester loam,
2-6% slopes,
moderately eroded
Non-hydric 0% Well drained 13.6%
LcD Lester loam,
10-16% slopes Non-hydric 2% Well drained 3.3%
LcC2
Lester loam,
6-10% slopes,
moderately eroded
Non-hydric 2% Well drained 7.6%
Wb
Webster-
Glencoe silty
clay loams
Hydric 100% Poorly drained 4.8%
Hydric soils are defined in the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric
Soils, version 8.2, 2018; The 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland s Delineation Manual; and The Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0).
RESOURCE REVIEW
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 6
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PUBLIC WATER INVENTORY:
The MN Department of Natural Resources Public Water Inventory for Scott County, MN (Appendix A, Figure 4),
does identify public water within the project extent. Spring Lake (70005400) reaches into the southeastern part
of the parcel.
30-DAY ROLLING PRECIPITATION DATA:
A review of the 30-day rolling precipitation data collected from the University of Minnesota Climatology Working
Group (Appendix D) indicates that precipitation totals for the weeks prior to the first site visit were below the
range of average in the general investigation area and above average for the second field visit. The overall
hydrologic conditions were suitable, however, for completing an accurate wetland determination and boundary
delineation.
FIELD REVIEW
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 7
FIELD REVIEW
WETLAND 1
Wetland 1 is a PFO1A, Type 1, floodplain forest that is approximately 1.09 acres in size (Appendix A, Figure 5). The
wetland is primarily vegetated with sugar maple (Acer saccharum), wild black current (Ribes americanum), ramps
(Allium tricoccum), and yellow avens (Geum aleppicum). The underlying soils are mapped as ‘Glencoe silty clay
loam, 0-1% slopes.’ The investigated soil profile met the ‘thick dark surface’ hydric soil indicator. The hydrology
indicators observed include a sparsely vegetated concave surface, a high water table observed at a depth of eight
inches and saturation observed at the soil surface.
The upland buffer surrounding the wetland is dominated by sugar maple (Acer saccharum) and wild black current
(Ribes americanum). The wetland-upland transition areas are formed by gentle slopes and are within the ‘Glencoe
silty clay loam, 0-1% slopes’ soil unit.
WETLAND 2
Wetland 2 is a PEM1F/C/B/A/PSS1A/PFO1A, Type 1/2/3/4/6, seasonally flooded basin/ floodplain forest/ shrub
swamp/ fresh wet meadow/ shallow marsh/ deep marsh – wetland complex. It extends off-site to the southwest.
The on-site portion is approximately 12.65 acres in size (Appendix A, Figure 5). The wetland is primarily vegetated
with grey alder (Alnus incana), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), buckthorn
(Rhamnus cathartica), rock elm (Ulmus thomasii), red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), gray dogwood (Cornus
racemosa), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) and red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa). The underlying soils are
mapped in the following soil units; Glencoe silty clay loam, 0-1% slopes; Webster-Glencoe silty clay loams; Lester
soils, 18-25%; Houghton muck, 0-1%; Webster-Le Sueur silty clay loams; Lester loam, 2-6% slopes; Lester loam, 6-
10% slopes, moderately eroded. The investigated soil profile met the ‘thick dark surface’ hydric soil indicator. The
wetland hydrology indicators observed include saturation, geomorphic position, highwater table, and a sparsely
vegetated concave surface.
The upland buffer surrounding the wetland is predominately vegetated with grey alder (Alnus incana), reed canary
grass (Phalaris arundinacea), buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), sugar maple (Acer saccharum), boxelder maple
(Acer negundo), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), garlic mustard (Alliaria
petiolata), and yellow avens (Geum aleppicum). The wetland-upland transition areas are formed by gentle to
moderate slopes and occur within the following soil units; Glencoe silty clay loam, 0-1% slopes; Webster-Glencoe
silty clay loams; Lester soils, 18-25%; Houghton muck, 0-1%; Webster-Le Sueur silty clay loams; Lester loam, 2-6%
slopes; Lester loam, 6-10% slopes, moderately eroded.
WETLAND 3
Wetland 3 is a PEM1C, Type 3, shallow marsh that is approximately 0.12 acres in size (Appendix A, Figure 5). The
wetland is primarily vegetated with Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum). The
underlying soils are mapped as ‘Webster-Le Sueur silty clay loams.’ The investigated soil profile met the ‘thick
FIELD REVIEW
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 8
dark surface’ hydric soil indicator. The hydrology indicators observed include saturation observed at the soil
surface and a high water table observed at a depth of eight inches.
The upland buffer and transition area surrounding the wetland is formed by gentle slopes. The vegetation is also
dominated by Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) and switchgrass (Panicum virgatum). The underlying soils are
also mapped as ‘Webster-Le Sueur silty clay loams.’
INVESTIGATION AREA A
Investigation Area A is a nonwetland area located south of Marschall Road between Wetland 2 and 3. The area is
dominated by common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), prickly gooseberry (Ribes cynosbati), and reed canary
grass (Phalaris arundinacea). The underlying soils are mapped as ‘Webster-Le Sueur silty clay loams.’ Hydrophytic
vegetation and wetland hydrology were observed in the area, however, no hydric soil indicators were met.
INVESTIGATION AREA B
Investigation Area B is a nonwetland area located at the end of Sunset Avenue. The area is dominated by balsam
fir (Abies balsamea), box elder (Acer negundo), pigweed (Amaranthus albus), and smooth brome (Bromus inermis).
The underlying soils are mapped as ‘Lester loam, 2-6% slopes.’ Wetland hydrology indicators were met in the area,
however, hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils were not present.
FIELD REVIEW
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019 P a g e 9
I certify that I performed the field analysis and wrote the report for this wetland determination.
_________________________________ ___________________
Katie Ring Date
Environmental Associate
Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC
I certify that I performed the field analysis and/or reviewed work completed by above staff.
_________________________________ ___________________
Benjamin J Hodapp, PWS Date
Environmental Services Manager
MN Certified Wetland Delineator #1016
Anderson Engineering of Minnesota, LLC
05-01-2019
05-01-2019
CONCLUSION
Three wetlands or portions thereof were identified and delineated in accordance with the 1987 United States
Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual within the investigation area. Wetland 1 is a PFO1C, Type
1, floodplain forest. Wetland 2 is a PEM1F/C/B/A/PSS1A/PFO1A, Type 1/2/3/4/6, seasonally flooded
basin/floodplain forest/fresh wet meadow/shallow marsh/deep marsh/shrub swamp. Wetland 3 is a PEM1C, Type
3, shallow marsh.
The wetlands in the investigation area may be regulated by several agencies at the local, state, and/or federal
level. Activities which may potentially impact wetlands should be discussed in advance with the appropriate
regulating agency regarding potential permit requirements. The Local Government Unit (LGU) responsible for
implementing the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act at this project location is Scott County Soil and Water
Conservation District.
The watershed district and the county may require vegetated buffers around all regulated wetland areas. Wetland
buffers must meet the standards specified by the watershed district and the county for any project that is
regulated under the Wetland Conservation Act.
See Appendix E for Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology (MnRAM) wetland functional assessment
resulting in a ‘Preserve’ classification for wetland 1 and wetland 2 and a ‘Manage 2’ classification for wetland 3.
This wetland investigation meets the standards and criteria described in the 1987 United States Army Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and all applicable subsequent guidance for an on-site determination. The
results reflect the conditions present at the time of the delineation.
Appendix A
FIGURES
^_
Latitude: 44.699456Longitude: -93.492277
Legend
Project Extent
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 2.11.2019
IScale:1 inch = 0.5 miles
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 1Site Location
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
L2UBH
PEM1C
PEM1A
PEM1A
PEM1A
PEM1A
PEM1A
PEM1Cd
PEM1A
L1UBH
PEM1C
PUBFx
PFO1A
PEM1A
PFO1A
PUBGx
PEM1Ad R2UBFx
Legend
Project ExtentScott Co. ParcelsNational Wetland Inventory
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 2.11.2019
IScale:1 inch = 400 feet
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 2National Wetland Inventory
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
W
Wc Ga
Wc
PbA
LcB
LcB
LcC2
Ga
LcB2
LcC
Ma
Wb
LcB
LcB
Ga
LcB
LcD
LcC
LcC2
LcC2
LcCWc
TcB
LcB2 LcC2WbWb
LdE3
LcD
LcD2
LcD2
Legend
Project ExtentScott Co. ParcelsHydric Rating by Map Unit0% Hydric Components1-32% Hydric Componen ts33-65% Hydric Compone nts66-99% Hydric Compone nts100% Hydric Componen ts
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 2.11.2019
IScale:1 inch = 400 feet
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 3Scott County Soil Survey
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
Spring Lake70005400
70005900
Campbell Lake70005600
70020600
70005500Howard Lake70007300
Legend
Project ExtentScott Co. ParcelsMN DNR InventoriedPublic WatercourseMN DNR InventoriedPublic Waterbasin
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 2.11.2019
IScale:1 inch = 0.25 miles
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 4Public Waters Inventory
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
912.94Spring Lake70005400
1
2
IA-A
Wetland 2Type 1/2/3/4/6PEM1F/C/B/A/PSS1A/PFO1ASeasonally Flooded Basin/Floodplain Forest/Fresh (Wet) Meadow/Shallow Marsh/Deep Marsh/Shrub Swamp12.65 Ac.
Wetland 1Type 1PFO1AFloodplain Forest1.09 Ac.
Ä
ÄÄ
Ä
2
AB
IA-B
Wetland 3Type 3PEM1CShallow Marsh0.12 Ac.3
A
B
C D
BA
E
F
G
IJ
H
Legend
Project ExtentScott Co. ParcelsWetland Field Delineated4/16/2019-4/24/2019Sample PointCulvertChannelOrdinary High Water
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 4.24.2019
IScale:1 inch = 400 feet
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 5Wetland Delineation
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
Appendix B
ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD DATASHEETS
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Quercus ellipsoidalis
Populus tremuloides FAC Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
5
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Acer saccharum
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
drainageway
15
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Yes
60
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
152
2.96Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
106
(Plot size:
Prunus virginiana
30
0
FACU
53
50
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
25
343
5
116
Rhamnus cathartica
FACU
FAC
FACW
Yes
Allium tricoccum 3
80
Herb Stratum 5
No
(Plot size:
FACW
15
No
Geum aleppicum
Ribes americanum
)
Unknown bunching grass observed at 3%. Grass was observed mostly in wetland landscape positions and deemed FACW, based on our best
professional judgement.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
20
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 1ASampling Point:
Indicators were met for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology - area determined to be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
concave
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 1 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Glencoe silty clay loam NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
UPL species
Yes
UPL
(Plot size:
No
20
Tree Stratum
No
30
5
Absolute
% Cover
FACU
Total % Cover of:
15 )
6
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
38
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2
4
50.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
3
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
60 40 C M
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
X
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 4/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
24 - 30
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
10YR 5/4 Distinct redox concentrations
0 - 24 Loamy/Clayey
8
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The thick dark surface indicator was met - hydric soil is present in the area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
1ASOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Saturation was present at the soil surface. The water table was present at depth of 8 inches. 'Sparsely vegetated concave surface' and 'geomorphic
position' indicators were met. Wetland hydrology is present in this area.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
35
Prevalence Index worksheet:
1
2
50.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
Yes
FACW
(Plot size:
No
20
Tree Stratum
No
30
5
Absolute
% Cover
FACU
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 1BSampling Point:
indicators for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology were not observed. Area determine to not be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
concave
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 1 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Glencoe silty clay loam
Hydrophytic vegetation indicators were not met - hydrophytic vegetation net present in this area.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
20
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
FACW
15
No
Ribes americanum
)
Rhamnus cathartica FAC
Yes
80
Herb Stratum 5
No
50
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
310
0
110
drainageway
15
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
60
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
140
2.82Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
110
(Plot size:
Prunus virginiana
30
0
FACU
55
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Quercus palustris
Populus tremuloides FAC Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
5
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Acer saccharum
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
1BSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
The water table was present at depth of 24 inches. Wetland hydrology is not present in this area.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
24
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
No hydric soil indicators were met - hydric soil was not present in this area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 24 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture RemarksColor (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.X
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
FACW
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
Echinocystis lobata
100
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2
2
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
(Plot size:Tree Stratum 30
Absolute
% Cover
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2ASampling Point:
Hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils were present but wetland hydrology was not met. The area was determined to not be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
convex
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
2 - 6 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Lester loam, 2 - 6% slopes none
Dominance test indicator was met. Hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
0
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
FACWAlnus incana
)
FACW
Yes
Phalaris arundinacea 100
10
Herb Stratum 5
3 No
10
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
3
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
226
0
113
Hillslopes, ground moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
0
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
2.00Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
226
(Plot size:
0
113
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
100 RM
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
2ASOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Saturation was observed at the soil surface. The watertable was observed at a depth of 18 inches. Wetland hydrology is present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
18
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The 'thick dark surface' indicator was met - hydric soils are present in the area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 18 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
18 - 24
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
N 4/
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
FACW
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
Echinocystis lobata
100
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2
2
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
(Plot size:Tree Stratum 30
Absolute
% Cover
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2BSampling Point:
Hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils were present but wetland hydrology was not met. The area was determined to not be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
convex
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
2 - 6 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Lester loam, 2 - 6% slopes none
Dominance test indicator was met. Hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
0
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
FACWAlnus incana
)
FACW
Yes
Phalaris arundinacea 100
10
Herb Stratum 5
3 No
10
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
3
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
226
0
113
Hillslopes, ground moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
0
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
2.00Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
226
(Plot size:
0
113
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
80 20 C
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
2BSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Wetland hydrology was not observed in the field. Only one secondary indicator, FAC-neutral test, was met. Wetland hydrology is not present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The redox dark surface indicator was met. Hydric soil is present.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
10YR 4/4 Distinct redox concentrations
0 - 4 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
4 - 20
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 2/1
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation X , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.X
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
(Plot size:Tree Stratum 30
Absolute
% Cover
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2CSampling Point:
Hydric indicators were met for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology - area was determined to be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
concave
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 2 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Webster-Le Sueur PEM1A
Sample point is in a tilled agricultural field.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:)Herb Stratum 5
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Swales on moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Multiply by:
(Plot size:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
96 4 C M
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
2CSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Soil saturated to surface. The area is at the toe of a slope meeting the geomorphic position indicator. Wetland hydrology is present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The indicator, 'thick dark surface', was met - hydric soils are present in the area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
10YR 4/4 Distinct redox concentrations
0 - 16 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
16 - 26
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 5/1
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation X , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
(Plot size:Tree Stratum 30
Absolute
% Cover
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2DSampling Point:
The vegetation in the area was problematic due to row crop agriculture and tilling. Hydric soil and wetland hydrology indicators were not met and the
area was determine to not be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
concave
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 2 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Webster-Le Sueur PEM1A
Vegetation is problematic because sample point is in a tilled agricultural field. No vegetation was standing. Plowed corn stubble was present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:)Herb Stratum 5
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Swales on moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Multiply by:
(Plot size:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
2DSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
No wetland hydrology was observed and no indicators were met. Wetland hydrology was not present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
No hydric soil indicators were met. Hydric soil not present.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 16 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture RemarksColor (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 2/1
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.X
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover100
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
5
5
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
Yes
FAC
(Plot size:
30
Tree Stratum
Yes
30
10
Absolute
% Cover
FACW
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2ESampling Point:
Indicators were met for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology - area was determined wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
none
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 1 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Glencoe silty clay loam PEM1A
Dominance test and prevalence index indicators were met - hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
15
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
FACW
5
Cornus sericea
)
FACW
Yes
Phalaris arundinacea 100
20
Herb Stratum 5
Yes
15
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
335
0
160
Drainageway
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
45
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
2.09Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
290
(Plot size:
Rhamnus cathartica
40
0
FAC
145
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Rhamnus cathartica
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Acer saccharinum
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
60 40 RM
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
2ESOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Saturation was present at the surface meeting the saturation indicator - wetland hydrology is present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
16
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The thick dark surface indicator was met - hydric soils are present.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
10YR 2/1
0 - 32 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
32 - 38
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 6/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Acer saccharinum
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Rhamnus cathartica
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Drainageway
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
210
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
2.70Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
60
(Plot size:
70
0
30
30
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
270
0
100
Yes
30
Herb Stratum 5(Plot size:
FACRhamnus cathartica
)
The dominance test indicator was met - hydrophytic vegetation is present in the area.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
70
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2FSampling Point:
Hydrophytic vegetation was present, but hydric soil and wetland hydrology were not present. The area was determined not to be a wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
none
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 1 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Glencoe silty clay loam PEM1ANWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
UPL species
Yes
FACW
(Plot size:
40
Tree Stratum
Yes
30
30
Absolute
% Cover
FAC
Total % Cover of:
15 )
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
3
3
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
18 - 20
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 18 Loamy/Clayey
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
No hydric soil indicators were observed - hydric soil is not present in the area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
2FSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Wetland hydrolgy was not observed in the field. Wetland hydrology is not present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.X
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover20
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
6
6
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
Yes
FAC
(Plot size:
20
Tree Stratum
Yes
30
10
Absolute
% Cover
FAC
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2GSampling Point:
Indicators were met for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology - area is determined wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
none
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 1 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Houghton muck none
The dominance test indicator was met - hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
70
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
FACW
20
Yes
Cornus sericea
)
Rhamnus cathartica
FACW
FAC
Yes
Phalaris arundinacea 20
100
Herb Stratum 5
Yes
60
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
370
0
150
Depressions
20
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
210
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
2.47Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
160
(Plot size:
Cornus racemosa
30
0
FAC
80
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Ulmus thomasii
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Rhamnus cathartica
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
100
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
2GSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Saturation was observed at soil surface - wetland hydrolgy is present in the area.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The 'thick dark surface' indicator was met - hydric soils are present.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 16 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
16 - 22
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 6/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Depressions
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
No
0
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
100
2.48Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
160
(Plot size:
0
80
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
260
0
105FACW
FACU
Phalaris arundinacea 80
Herb Stratum 5(Plot size:
Solidago canadensis
5Glechoma hederacea FACU
)
Vegetation met 'Dominance Test' indicators - hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
0
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2HSampling Point:
Hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils are present, however, no indicators for wetland hydrology were observed. Area determined not wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
none
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 1 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Houghton muck noneNWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
UPL species
(Plot size:Tree Stratum 30
Absolute
% Cover
Total % Cover of:
15 )
105
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
25
Prevalence Index worksheet:
1
1
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
No
20
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
100
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 6/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
16 - 22
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 16 Loamy/Clayey
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Hydric soil indicators were met - hydric soil is present in this area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
2HSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
No indicators of wetland hydrology were observed - wetland hydrology is not present in area.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
hillslopes, ground moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
0
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
20
2.12Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
160
(Plot size:
80
0
80
5
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
180
0
85
Yes
5
Herb Stratum 5(Plot size:
FACUSambucus racemosa
)
The prevalence index indicator was met - hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
0
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2ISampling Point:
Indicators were met for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology - area is determined to be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
none
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10 - 16 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Lester loam, 10 - 16% slopes PEM1ANWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
UPL species
Yes
(Plot size:
80
Tree Stratum 30
Absolute
% Cover
FACW
Total % Cover of:
15 )
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
5
Prevalence Index worksheet:
1
2
50.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
100
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 6/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
24 - 30
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 24 Loamy/Clayey
8
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The thick dark surface indicator was met - hydric soils are present.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
2ISOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Water table observed at a depth of 8 inches. Saturation observed at soil surface. Area occurs in a sparsely vegetation concave surface. Wetland
hydrology is present in the area.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
5
10
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
20
Prevalence Index worksheet:
5
6
83.3%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
Yes
FACW
(Plot size:
30
Tree Stratum
Yes
30
10
Absolute
% Cover
FAC
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/17/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 2JSampling Point:
Hydrophytic vegetation is present in the area, however, indicators were not met for hydric soils or wetland hydrology - area was determined to not be
wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
none
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10 - 16 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Lester loam, 10 - 16% slopes PEM1A
Vegetation meets the dominance test indicator - hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
65
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
FAC
20
Geum aleppicum
Acer negundo
)
FAC
FACW
Yes
Alliaria petiolata 5
50
Herb Stratum 5
Yes
30
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
305
0
100
hillslopes, ground moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Yes
195
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
80
3.05Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
30
(Plot size:
Sambucus racemosa
40
0
FACU
15
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Acer negundo
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
2JSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
No wetland hydrology indicators were observed - wetland hydrology was not present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
no hydric soil indicators were met - hydric soil is not present in the area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 34 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
34 - 36
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.X
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 feet )
=Total Cover
50
100
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2
2
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
(Plot size:Tree Stratum 30 feet
Absolute
% Cover
Total % Cover of:
15 feet )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/24/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 3ASampling Point:
Indicators were met for hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology - area is determined to be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
Concave
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0-2 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Webster-Le Sueur PEM1A
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
100
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
Panicum virgatum
)
FAC
FAC
Poa pratensis 50
Herb Stratum 5 feet
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
300
0
100
Swales on moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Yes
300
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
3.00Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
0
(Plot size:
0
0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
95 5 C
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
3ASOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
8
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Road grade encountered.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
10YR 4/4 Distinct redox concentrations
0-18 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
18-24
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 5/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Swales on moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Yes
300
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
3.00Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
0
(Plot size:
0
0
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
300
0
100FAC
FAC
Poa pratensis 50
Herb Stratum 5 feet(Plot size:
Panicum virgatum
)
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
100
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/24/2019
Winkler Land Co MN 3BSampling Point:
The indicator for wetland hydrology was not met - area is determined not to be wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
Concave
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0-2 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Webster-Le Sueur PEM1ANWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
UPL species
(Plot size:Tree Stratum 30 feet
Absolute
% Cover
Total % Cover of:
15 feet )
100
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2
2
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 feet )
=Total Cover
50
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
95 5 C
X
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes X No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 5/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
18-24
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
10YR 4/4 Distinct redox concentrations
0-18 Loamy/Clayey
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
Roadbed encountered.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
3BSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.X
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover100
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
3
3
100.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
UPL species
No
(Plot size:
3
Tree Stratum 30
Absolute
% Cover
FACW
Total % Cover of:
15 )
NWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/24/2019
Winkler Land Co MN IA-ASampling Point:
Hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology are present in the area, however, no hydric soil indicators were present - the area was determined to
not be wetland
-93.492666 WGS84
none
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
0 - 2 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Webster-Le Sueur PEM1A
Vegetation meets the dominance test indicator - hydrophytic vegetation is present.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
7
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
(Plot size:
FAC
3
Rhamnus cathartica
)
FACW
Yes
Phalaris arundinacea 100
7
Herb Stratum 5
Yes
4
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
227
0
110
swales on moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
21
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
2.06Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Multiply by:
206
(Plot size:
Ribes cynosbati
3
0
FAC
103
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE#15330
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
90 10 C M
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Geomorphic Position (D2)
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
IA-ASOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
The geomorphic position and FAC-Neutral test secondary indicators were met - wetland hydrology is present in the area.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
The soil did not meet any hydric soil indicators - hydric soil is not present in the area.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
10YR 4/6 Prominent redox concentrations
0 - 36 Loamy/Clayey
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
36 - 42
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
2.5Y 3/2
10YR 2/1
Loamy/Clayey
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:State:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Slope (%):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X
Yes X Yes X
Yes X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
5.
(A/B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
2.
3.x 1 =
4.x 2 =
5.x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
1.Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
9.
10.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Midwest Region
Marschall Rd, Prior Lake. AE# 15330
Acer negundo
Acer saccharinum
Pinus resinosa
FACW Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
2
No
No
No
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Abies balsamea
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hillslopes, ground moraines
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Yes
9
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
68
3.28Prevalence Index = B/A =
2
0
Multiply by:
18
(Plot size:
14
0
9
3 No
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
3
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
95
0
29FACU
FACU
Amaranthus albus 10
Herb Stratum 5(Plot size:
Bromus inermis
)
No hydrohphytic vegetation indicator was met.
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
=Total Cover
Yes
3
Indicator
Status
Dominant
Species?
City/County:Spring Lake Twp, Scott County Sampling Date:04/24/2019
Winkler Land Co MN IA-BSampling Point:
Wetland hydrology indicators were observed but hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils were not present. The area was determined to not be
wetland.
-93.492666 WGS84
concave
Alex Yellick, Katie Ring S8, T114N, R22WSection, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
2 - 6 Long:44.696030 Datum:
Remarks:
Lester loam, 2 - 6% slopes noneNWI classification:
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.)
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
UPL species
Yes
FAC
(Plot size:
FACW
No
Salix amygdaloides
5
No
Tree Stratum
No FACU
Yes
2
30
3
Absolute
% Cover
FACW
Total % Cover of:
15 )
15
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
Percent of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
No
17
Prevalence Index worksheet:
2
4
50.0%
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FACU species
=Total Cover
(Plot size:15 )
=Total Cover
5
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
X
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes X No
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 4/4
10YR 3/2
Sandy
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)
Dark Surface (S7)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Matrix
Texture Remarks
8-16
Color (moist)
Histosol (A1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
unless disturbed or problematic.
wetland hydrology must be present,
0 - 8 Sandy
8
5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3)
No hydric soil indicators were met.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
HYDROLOGY
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Gauge or Well Data (D9)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Remarks:
IA-BSOIL
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Saturation was observed at the soil surface. The water table was observed at a depth of 8 inches. Wetland hydrology is present.
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
(includes capillary fringe)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
0
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Field Observations:
US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region – Version 2.0
Appendix C
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX C. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019
Photo 1. Wetland 1, viewing northeast Photo 2. Wetland 2, floodplain forest, viewing
northeast
Photo 3. Wetland 2, fresh wet meadow, viewing
southeast
Photo 4. Wetland 2, shrub swamp – upland transition,
viewing west
Photo 5. Wetland 2, fresh wet meadow – shallow
marsh transition, viewing south
Photo 6. Wetland 2, seasonally flooded basin, viewing
northwest
APPENDIX C. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019
Photo 7. Wetland 3, viewing northeast Photo 8. Wetland 2, ditch along Marschall Rd, viewing
southwest
Photo 9. Ditch along Marschall Rd, northeast of
wetland areas, viewing southwest
Photo 10. Ditch along Marschall Rd, northeast of
wetland areas, viewing northeast
Appendix D
ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION RECORD
APPENDIX D. PRECIPITATION RECORD
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019
Appendix D, Figure 1. Graph of recent precipitation in comparison with the normal range of precipitation in the
general site location. Daily precipitation data is plotted independently and as a 30-day rolling total up to the
date of the site visit. The normal range is plotted from precipitation data recorded from 1981 to 2010. The
normal range is represented in this graph with two lines, the 30th percentile and the 70th percentile of the
period-of-record data distribution.
Source: http://climate.umn.edu/
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
16-Jan-19 16-Feb-19 16-Mar-19 16-Apr-19PRECIPITATION (INCHES)DATE
Scott County, MN -April 16 & April 24, 2019
S8 T114 R22W
Daily Precipitation
Site Visit
30 Day Rolling Total
Normal Monthly Range
APPENDIX D. PRECIPITATION RECORD
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019
Appendix D, Figure 2. Minnesota State Climatology Office maps depicting total precipitation for the week of the
site visit, percent of normal precipitation, and precipitation ranking for the current growing season.
Week of April 10 – April 16th
Source: https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/weekmap/weekmap_190416.html
APPENDIX D. PRECIPITATION RECORD
WETLAND INVESTIGATION
Winkler Land Co, LLC
Marschall Rd, SPRING LAKE TWP
May 1st, 2019
Week of April 17th – April 23rd
Source: https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/climate/weekmap/weekmap_190423.html
Appendix E
MINNESOTA ROUTINE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY (MnRAM)
Management Classification Report for
116
15330 WinklerMarschall Rd, Prior Lake, W1
County
Corps Bank Service Area
SCOTT
33
9
ID:
Minnesota (Shakopee)Watershed, #
Based on the MnRAM data input from field and office review and using the classification settings as shown below,
this wetland is classified as
Functional rank of this wetland
based on MnRAM data Functional Category
Self-defined classification value
settings for this management level
Vegetative Diversity/Integrity
Habitat Structure (wildlife)
Amphibian Habitat
Fish Habitat
Shoreline Protection
Aesthetic/Cultural/Rec/Ed and Habitat
Stormwater/Urban Sensitivity and Vegetative Diversity
Wetland Water Quality and Vegetative Diversity
Characteristic Hydrology and Vegetative Diversity
Flood/Stormwater Attenuation*
Commericial use*
Downstream Water Quality*
Not Applicable
High
High
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Moderate
Not Applicable
High
Moderate
High
Moderate
The critical function that caused this wetland to rank as
High
Details of the formula for this action are shown below:
Preserve
Exceptional
Exceptional
High
Exceptional
High
Exceptional
Exceptional
High
High
-
-
-
Preserve
Maintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat
was
/High
/
/
/
Moderate
High
High
(Q43) * [( Q44 + 2*Q23wildlife + Q14 +Q 41 +
Q20 reversed)/6]
Value Description
Maintenance of Characteristic Amphibian Habitat
Question
14 Upland land use1
20 Stormwater runoff1
23 Buffer width1
41 Wildlife barriers0.5
43 Amphib breeding potential--fish presence1
44 Amphib & reptile overwintering habitat0
Friday, April 19, 2019This report was printed on:
* The classification value settings for these functions are not adjustable
Friday, April 19, 2019MnRAM Site Assessment Report
15330 WinklerMarschall Rd, Prior Lake, W1
Assessment Purpose: Planning
This wetland has been drained or altered 0% from its original size of 1.08 acres.
This wetland is located in Spring Lake Township Township.
Site conditions were Normal. This wetland is estimated to cover 1.08 acres.
This report reflects conditions on the ground at the date of the assessment and, unless noted or implicit in the
standard questions, does not reflect speculation on the future or past conditions.
SCOTT County, Minnesota (Shakopee) Watershed, Corps Bank Service Area #9
Wetland ID: 116, Township 114, Section 8, Range 22
General Features
Hydrogeomorphology
The maximum water depth at this site is 24 inches, with 80 percent inundated. With an immedidate drainage
area of 15 acres, it is doubtful that this wetland is sustainable given its small catchment area.
Special Features
Vegetative Communities
The soils in the immediate wetland area are primarily Glencoe silty clay loam, depressional, 0 to 1 percent
slopes. The adjacent upland, to about 500 feet, is Lester loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes.
The following plant communities were observed:
(See Appendix A for details on the Dominant Species per plant community)
Vegetation and Upland Buffer
The extent of vegetation in this wetland is about 5 percent and the naturalized buffer width averages 400 feet.
Vegetated buffers around wetlands provide multiple benefits including wildlife habitat, erosion protection, and
a reduction in surface water runoff.
This buffer serves as an excellent buffer for wetland water quality. It provides moderate coverage for wildlife.
Soils
Wetland:Project:
There were no special features observed at the site at the time of this assessment
As a Depressional/Tributary wetland, this site has an outlet but no perennial inlet or drainage
entering from the upstream subwatershed. As such, Placeholder for Depressional/Tributary
discussion.
Floodplain Forest Type 1, PFO1C. This community had a vegetative index of high and comprised 0 percent
Page 1 of 4
Functional Ratings
Function Rating Comment
Vegetative Diversity High High-functioning vegetative communities reflect the presence of diverse,
native wetland species and a lack of non-native or invasive species.
Additional stormwater
treatment needs
High Because the maintenance of wetland water quality index is high, no
additional treatment is called for.
Maintenance of
Hydrologic Regime
High Due either to careful human management or lack of alteration of the
outlet or watershed conditions, the wetland maintains a hydrologic
regime similar to the original wetland type. This stability supports
characteristic vegetative communities and is closely associated with
flood attenuation, water quality, and groundwater interaction.
Flood/Stormwater/Att
enuation
Moderate The wetland provides some flood storage and/or flood wave
attenuation. It may have either an altered or unrestricted outlet,
disturbed wetland soils, thin or little emergent vegetation (with channels)
or it may be situated high in a watershed with a low proportion of
impervious surfaces, moderate runoff volumes, loamy upland soils, and
one or more other wetlands present within the subwatershed.
Downstream Water
Quality
High This wetland has the ability and opportunity to protect valuable
downstream resources, including recreational waters. A wetland with
significant emergent vegetation and overland flow characteristics
removes sediment from stormwater. A high nutrient removal rating
indicates dense vegetation (to maximize nutrient uptake) and sheet
flow. The wetland may protect a valuable water resource within 0.5
miles downstream. More (and less-treated) runoff also increase a
wetland's opportunity to rate high for this function. Maintaining wide,
natural buffers and keeping out surges of untreated stormwater will help
maintain this wetland's role as a protector of important resources lower
in the watershed.
Maintenance of
Wetland Water
Quality
High Wetland water quality is high, indicating little need for additional
treatment. As long as upland land use and existing buffer conditions do
not change, this wetland can be expected to sustain current
characteristics.
Shoreline Protection Not
Applicable
The site does not fringe a deepwater habitat, lake, or is not within any
type of watercourse.
Maintenance of
Characteristic
Wildlife Habitat
Structure
High In additional to good vegetative quality, this site has complex
interspersion of communities, providing ample opportunities for species
to live and reproduce. It may be one of several different types of
wetlands or may be the last refuge of a given type in the vicinity.
Barriers do not fragment its value to temporary members of more
mobile species.
Maintenance of
Characteristic Fish
Habitat
Not
Applicable
The site is too isolated or does not remain wet enough to support a
population of fish or to allow for even temporary use as a refuge.
of the entire area.
Page 2 of 4
Maintenance of
Characteristic
Amphibian Habitat
High Optimal amphibian breeding habitat that lacks predatory fish, is deep
and well oxygenated, and provides habitat for a variety of species. Good
sites will have few barriers to movement (roads and development) as
well as wide, unmanicured buffers and pretreatment of runoff.
Aesthetics/Recreation
/Education/Cultural
Moderate Many wetlands are visible from nearby buildings or roads and are
accessible for some recreational activities. Excess negative human
influence (such as trash or alteration) will reduce the ranking of well-
used and highly-accessible sites.
Wetland restoration
potential
Not
Applicable
Because restoration would affect permanent structures or infrastructure
(houses, roads, septic systems), this site is not suitable for restoration.
Wetland Sensitivity to
Stormwater and
Urban Development
Moderate This wetland is moderately sensitive to stormwater; Floodplain forests,
fresh wet meadows dominated by reed canary grass, shallow and deep
marshes dominated by cattail, reed canary grass, giant reed or purple
loosestrife, and shallow, open water communities with low to moderate
vegetative diversity.
Page 3 of 4
Appendix A: Dominant Species By Plant Community
Dominant Species Percent CoverWetland Type Plant Community
Floodplain ForestPFO1Type 1
Yellow avens 0-3%
Wild leek 0-3%
Wild black currant >25-50%
Silver maple >10-25%
Page 4 of 4
Management Classification Report for
117
15330 WinklerMarschall Rd, Prior Lake, W2
County
Corps Bank Service Area
SCOTT
33
9
ID:
Minnesota (Shakopee)Watershed, #
Based on the MnRAM data input from field and office review and using the classification settings as shown below,
this wetland is classified as
Functional rank of this wetland
based on MnRAM data Functional Category
Self-defined classification value
settings for this management level
Vegetative Diversity/Integrity
Habitat Structure (wildlife)
Amphibian Habitat
Fish Habitat
Shoreline Protection
Aesthetic/Cultural/Rec/Ed and Habitat
Stormwater/Urban Sensitivity and Vegetative Diversity
Wetland Water Quality and Vegetative Diversity
Characteristic Hydrology and Vegetative Diversity
Flood/Stormwater Attenuation*
Commericial use*
Downstream Water Quality*
Low
Moderate
Low
High
High
Low
Not Applicable
High
Moderate
Moderate
High
The critical function that caused this wetland to rank as
Moderate
Details of the formula for this action are shown below:
Preserve
Exceptional
Exceptional
High
Exceptional
High
Exceptional
Exceptional
High
High
-
-
-
Preserve
Shoreline Protection
was
/High
/
/
/
Moderate
High
High
(Q30+Q31+Q32+Q33+Q34)/5
Value Description
Shoreline Protection
Question
30 Shoreline rooted vegetation (%cover )1
31 Shoreline wetland in-water width1
32 Shoreline emergent veg/erosion resistance1
33 Shoreline erosion potential1
34 Shoreline upslope veg/bank protection0.5
Friday, April 19, 2019This report was printed on:
* The classification value settings for these functions are not adjustable
Friday, April 19, 2019MnRAM Site Assessment Report
15330 WinklerMarschall Rd, Prior Lake, W2
This wetland has been drained or altered 0% from its original size of 13.01 acres.
This wetland is located in Spring Lake Township Township.
Site conditions were Normal. This wetland is estimated to cover 13.01 acres.
This report reflects conditions on the ground at the date of the assessment and, unless noted or implicit in the
standard questions, does not reflect speculation on the future or past conditions.
SCOTT County, Minnesota (Shakopee) Watershed, Corps Bank Service Area #9
Wetland ID: 117, Township 114, Section 8, Range 22
General Features
Hydrogeomorphology
The maximum water depth at this site is 18 inches, with 80 percent inundated. With an immedidate drainage
area of 60 acres, it is doubtful that this wetland is sustainable given its small catchment area.
Special Features
As a shoreline wetland, this site has the potential to protect from erosion and provide spawning and nursery
habitat for fish and wildlife. The potential for erosion and/or slope failure of shoreline or streambank areas is
also dependent on the land use and condition on the slope above the water level and on top of the bank.
Deep-rooted grasses allowed to grow naturally provide the most protection, as will species with stronger
stems; this includes submerged macrophytes. The greater the vegetation density, the greater the shoreline
protection.
The soils in the immediate wetland area are primarily Glencoe silty clay loam, depressional, 0 to 1 percent
slopes. The adjacent upland, to about 500 feet, is Lester fine sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes.
Vegetation and Upland Buffer
The extent of vegetation in this wetland is about 95 percent and the naturalized buffer width averages 40 feet.
Vegetated buffers around wetlands provide multiple benefits including wildlife habitat, erosion protection, and
a reduction in surface water runoff.
This buffer provides some protection for the wetland water quality but little habitat for wildlife.
Soils
Wetland:Project:
L State Coastal Zone or Shoreland Management Plan area.
M Shoreland area identified in a zoning ordinance.
As a Depressional/Tributary wetland, this site has an outlet but no perennial inlet or drainage
entering from the upstream subwatershed. As such, Placeholder for Depressional/Tributary
discussion.
Page 1 of 4
Vegetative Communities
Functional Ratings
The majority of vegetation at this site, such as it is, does not contribute to wetland function beyond water
retention and flow resistance. However, because the weighted average can "hide" smaller communities,
always check for even small patches of high-quality species.
The highest rated community was the Floodplain Forest community rated at 1. Averaging all the communities
together, the Vegetative Diversity and Integrity of this wetland is Moderate. A more accurate look uses a
weighted average; using this method, this site shows a Low Vegetative Diversity and Integrity.
The following plant communities were observed:
(See Appendix A for details on the Dominant Species per plant community)
Function Rating Comment
N Floodplain area identified in a zoning ordinance or map.
Vegetative Diversity Moderate Moderate-functioning vegetative communities indicate a presence of
native wetland species with substantial non-native or invasive species.
Additional stormwater
treatment needs
Moderate Sediment removal would improve the ability of this site to maintain water
quality.
Maintenance of
Hydrologic Regime
Moderate There has been some degree of human alteration of the wetland
hydrology, either by outlet control or by altering immediate watershed
conditions. However, the wetland retains some of the hydrologic regime
similar to the original wetland type, either in part of the wetland or
overall to some extent. Because of the interference (whether active or
inadvertant), some characteristic vegetative communities have likely
been affected, as also have the functions of flood attenuation, water
quality and groundwater interaction.
Seasonally Fl Basin Type 1, PEM1A. This community had a vegetative index of low and comprised 5
percent of the entire area.
Fresh Wet Meadow Type 2, PEM1B. This community had a vegetative index of low and comprised 76
percent of the entire area.
Shrub-carr Type 6, PSS1. This community had a vegetative index of moderate and comprised 5 percent of
the entire area.
Floodplain Forest Type 1, PFO1A. This community had a vegetative index of moderate and comprised 10
percent of the entire area.
Shallow Marsh Type 3, PEM1C. This community had a vegetative index of moderate and comprised 3
percent of the entire area.
Deep Marsh Type 4, PEMF. This community had a vegetative index of moderate and comprised 1 percent of
the entire area.
Page 2 of 4
Flood/Stormwater/Att
enuation
Moderate The wetland provides some flood storage and/or flood wave
attenuation. It may have either an altered or unrestricted outlet,
disturbed wetland soils, thin or little emergent vegetation (with channels)
or it may be situated high in a watershed with a low proportion of
impervious surfaces, moderate runoff volumes, loamy upland soils, and
one or more other wetlands present within the subwatershed.
Downstream Water
Quality
High This wetland has the ability and opportunity to protect valuable
downstream resources, including recreational waters. A wetland with
significant emergent vegetation and overland flow characteristics
removes sediment from stormwater. A high nutrient removal rating
indicates dense vegetation (to maximize nutrient uptake) and sheet
flow. The wetland may protect a valuable water resource within 0.5
miles downstream. More (and less-treated) runoff also increase a
wetland's opportunity to rate high for this function. Maintaining wide,
natural buffers and keeping out surges of untreated stormwater will help
maintain this wetland's role as a protector of important resources lower
in the watershed.
Maintenance of
Wetland Water
Quality
Moderate Wetland water quality is average. Sediment removal from incoming
water would benefit the site. Also consider reducing the amount of
stormwater directed at the site. Sustaining a diverse wetland may
require additional control over upland land use and the buffer.
Shoreline Protection High The site has a resource in need of protection (with wave action, sandy
erodible soils) and is capable of providing that protection with deep-
rooted, sturdy vegetation in a wide buffer.
Maintenance of
Characteristic
Wildlife Habitat
Structure
Moderate The site provides good habitat and is relatively accessible to wildlife,
although it may be somewhat isolated on the landscape and lack the
rich vegetative community and complex structure that would support a
wider range of wildlife.
Maintenance of
Characteristic Fish
Habitat
High The site has a direct connection to spawning or nursery habitat, or may
provide refuge or shade for native species of fish. Low amounts of
sediment mean that eggs are not smothered; good water quality
supports fish health.
Maintenance of
Characteristic
Amphibian Habitat
Low Predatory fish are always present and winter habitat unsuitable as site
often freezes to the bottom. High inputs of untreated stormwater or
unfiltered runoff contribute to poor water quality and reproductive
conditions.
Aesthetics/Recreation
/Education/Cultural
Low Inaccessible, distant from population centers, little-used sites that are
not culturally significant rank poorly even if their other functions rank
high. Usually, however, even the most distant sites have a potential for
recreational use and will drop to the lowest ranking only if they are
negatively affected by human alteration.
Wetland restoration
potential
Not
Applicable
Because restoration would affect permanent structures or infrastructure
(houses, roads, septic systems), this site is not suitable for restoration.
Wetland Sensitivity to
Stormwater and
Urban Development
High This wetland is highly sensitivity to stormwater; Shrub-carrs, alder
thickets, diverse fresh wet meadows dominated by native species,
diverse shallow and deep marshes, and diverse shallow, open water
communities.
Page 3 of 4
Appendix A: Dominant Species By Plant Community
Dominant Species Percent CoverWetland Type Plant Community
Seasonally Fl BasinPEM1Type 1
Fresh Wet MeadowPEM1Type 2
Reed canary grass >75-100%
Speckled alder >3-<10%
Shrub-carrPSS1Type 6
Silver maple >10-25%
Common buckthorn >25-50%
Gray dogwood >10-25%
Red-osier dogwood >50-75%
Reed canary grass >75-100%
Rock elm >3-<10%
Floodplain ForestPFO1Type 1
Garlic mustard >3-<10%
Green ash >75-100%
Red-berried elder >3-<10%
Yellow avens >3-<10%
Box elder >25-50%
Shallow MarshPEM1Type 3
Narrow-leaved cattail >10-25%
Reed canary grass >75-100%
Deep MarshPEMFType 4
Reed canary grass >10-25%
Narrow-leaved cattail >75-100%
Page 4 of 4
Management Classification Report for
118
15330 WinklerMarschall Rd, Prior Lake, W3
County
Corps Bank Service Area
SCOTT
33
9
ID:
Minnesota (Shakopee)Watershed, #
Based on the MnRAM data input from field and office review and using the classification settings as shown below,
this wetland is classified as
Functional rank of this wetland
based on MnRAM data Functional Category
Self-defined classification value
settings for this management level
Vegetative Diversity/Integrity
Habitat Structure (wildlife)
Amphibian Habitat
Fish Habitat
Shoreline Protection
Aesthetic/Cultural/Rec/Ed and Habitat
Stormwater/Urban Sensitivity and Vegetative Diversity
Wetland Water Quality and Vegetative Diversity
Characteristic Hydrology and Vegetative Diversity
Flood/Stormwater Attenuation*
Commericial use*
Downstream Water Quality*
Low
Moderate
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Moderate
Not Applicable
Moderate
High
Moderate
Moderate
The critical function that caused this wetland to rank as
Moderate
Details of the formula for this action are shown below:
Manage 2
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Low
Moderate
-
-
-
-
-
-
Manage 2
Maintenance of Characteristic Wildlife Habitat Structure
was
/Low
/
/
/
-
-
-
(Q3e*2+Q39+Q37+Q40+Q41+(Q23+Q24+Q25)/3+
Q13+Q20)/9
Value Description
Maintenance of Characteristic Wildlife Habitat Str
Question
13 Outlet: hydrologic regime1
20 Stormwater runoff1
23 Buffer width0.1
24 Adjacent area Management0.78
25 Adjacent area diversity0.48
37 Vegetation cover interspersion0.5
39 Detritus0.5
3e <No Description Found>0.1
* The classification value settings for these functions are not adjustable
Management Classification Report for
118
15330 WinklerMarschall Rd, Prior Lake, W3
County
Corps Bank Service Area
SCOTT
33
9
ID:
Minnesota (Shakopee)Watershed, #
40 Wetland interspersion/landscape1
41 Wildlife barriers0.5
Friday, April 26, 2019This report was printed on:
* The classification value settings for these functions are not adjustable
Friday, April 26, 2019MnRAM Site Assessment Report
15330 WinklerMarschall Rd, Prior Lake, W3
This wetland has been drained or altered 0% from its original size of 0.12 acres.
This wetland is located in Spring Lake Township Township.
Site conditions were Normal. This wetland is estimated to cover 0.12 acres.
This report reflects conditions on the ground at the date of the assessment and, unless noted or implicit in the
standard questions, does not reflect speculation on the future or past conditions.
SCOTT County, Minnesota (Shakopee) Watershed, Corps Bank Service Area #9
Wetland ID: 118, Township 114, Section 8, Range 22
General Features
Hydrogeomorphology
The maximum water depth at this site is 12 inches, with 95 percent inundated. With an immedidate drainage
area of 0.3 acres, it is doubtful that this wetland is sustainable given its small catchment area.
Special Features
Vegetative Communities
The soils in the immediate wetland area are primarily [Not Entered]. The adjacent upland, to about 500 feet, is
[Not Entered].
The following plant communities were observed:
(See Appendix A for details on the Dominant Species per plant community)
Vegetation and Upland Buffer
The extent of vegetation in this wetland is about 70 percent and the naturalized buffer width averages 0 feet.
Vegetated buffers around wetlands provide multiple benefits including wildlife habitat, erosion protection, and
a reduction in surface water runoff.
This buffer provides very little, if any, protection of water quality or habitat for wildlife.
Soils
Wetland:Project:
There were no special features observed at the site at the time of this assessment
As a Depressional/Isolated wetland, this site has no discernable inlets or outlets. As such, t is valued
for its ability to store water, especially if located lower in the watershed. If it does not already have
invasive species in the plant community, its lack of connection to upstream sites with such species
may protect it.
Shallow Marsh Type 3, PEM1C. This community had a vegetative index of low and comprised 100 percent
Page 1 of 4
Functional Ratings
The majority of vegetation at this site, such as it is, does not contribute to wetland function beyond water
retention and flow resistance. However, because the weighted average can "hide" smaller communities,
always check for even small patches of high-quality species.
The highest rated community was the Floodplain Forest community rated at 1. Averaging all the communities
together, the Vegetative Diversity and Integrity of this wetland is Low. A more accurate look uses a weighted
average; using this method, this site shows a Low Vegetative Diversity and Integrity.
Function Rating Comment
Vegetative Diversity Low If vegetation is present, the primary communities are compromised by
extensive invasive and/or non-native species. Ongoing maintenance will
be necessary to restore native ecologic communities, although the
presence of invasives upstream will limit the success of restoration
efforts.
Additional stormwater
treatment needs
Moderate Sediment removal would improve the ability of this site to maintain water
quality.
Maintenance of
Hydrologic Regime
Moderate There has been some degree of human alteration of the wetland
hydrology, either by outlet control or by altering immediate watershed
conditions. However, the wetland retains some of the hydrologic regime
similar to the original wetland type, either in part of the wetland or
overall to some extent. Because of the interference (whether active or
inadvertant), some characteristic vegetative communities have likely
been affected, as also have the functions of flood attenuation, water
quality and groundwater interaction.
Flood/Stormwater/Att
enuation
High The wetland provides ample flood storage and/or flood wave
attenuation. Outlet configuration is restricted (or unaltered) and
undisturbed wetland soils, and dense emergent vegetation without
channels allow the wetland to retard flood water. A high proportion of
impervious surfaces in the subwatershed, large runoff volumes, clayey
upland soils, and few wetlands present within the subwatershed may
position any wetland to be a good attenuator of excess water.
Downstream Water
Quality
Moderate This wetland has some ability and opportunity to protect downstream
resources. The ability of the wetland to remove sediment from
stormwater is determined by emergent vegetation and overland flow
characteristics. A high nutrient removal rating indicates dense
vegetation and sheet flow to maximize nutrient uptake and residence
time within the wetland. The opportunity for a wetland to protect a
valuable water resource diminishes with distance from the wetland so
wetlands with valuable waters within 0.5 miles downstream have the
greatest opportunity to provide protection, as do those that receive more
(and less-treated) runoff.
Maintenance of
Wetland Water
Quality
Moderate Wetland water quality is average. Sediment removal from incoming
water would benefit the site. Also consider reducing the amount of
stormwater directed at the site. Sustaining a diverse wetland may
require additional control over upland land use and the buffer.
of the entire area.
Page 2 of 4
Shoreline Protection Not
Applicable
The site does not fringe a deepwater habitat, lake, or is not within any
type of watercourse.
Maintenance of
Characteristic
Wildlife Habitat
Structure
Moderate The site provides good habitat and is relatively accessible to wildlife,
although it may be somewhat isolated on the landscape and lack the
rich vegetative community and complex structure that would support a
wider range of wildlife.
Maintenance of
Characteristic Fish
Habitat
Not
Applicable
The site is too isolated or does not remain wet enough to support a
population of fish or to allow for even temporary use as a refuge.
Maintenance of
Characteristic
Amphibian Habitat
Not
Applicable
Wetland never or rarely contains standing water and is not inundated
longenough most years to allow amphibians to successfully breed.
Aesthetics/Recreation
/Education/Cultural
Moderate Many wetlands are visible from nearby buildings or roads and are
accessible for some recreational activities. Excess negative human
influence (such as trash or alteration) will reduce the ranking of well-
used and highly-accessible sites.
Wetland restoration
potential
Not
Applicable
Because restoration would affect permanent structures or infrastructure
(houses, roads, septic systems), this site is not suitable for restoration.
Wetland Sensitivity to
Stormwater and
Urban Development
Moderate This wetland is moderately sensitive to stormwater; Floodplain forests,
fresh wet meadows dominated by reed canary grass, shallow and deep
marshes dominated by cattail, reed canary grass, giant reed or purple
loosestrife, and shallow, open water communities with low to moderate
vegetative diversity.
Page 3 of 4
Appendix A: Dominant Species By Plant Community
Dominant Species Percent CoverWetland Type Plant Community
Shallow MarshPEM1Type 3
Reed canary grass >50-75%
Narrow-leaved cattail >50-75%
Page 4 of 4
Appendix F
CREDENTIALS
Benjamin J. Hodapp, PWS
Environmental Specialist
13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-
mn.com
CERTIFICATIONS
Professional Wetland Scientist #1832
MN Certified Wetland Delineator #1016
EDUCATION
MS Water Resources Management
University of Wisconsin-Madison
BS Biology; Ecology
Minnesota State University- Mankato
SPECIALIZED TRAINING
Wetland Delineation & Management Training
Richard Chinn Environmental Training, Inc.
Wetland Plant Identification
Biotic Consultants Inc.
Plant Identification for Wetland Delineation
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Watershed Academy Web Certificate
United States Environmental Protection Agency
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
Society of Wetland Scientists
MN Wetland Professionals Association (WPA)
MN WPA President 2010
Wisconsin Wetlands Association
Association of State Wetland Managers
Minnesota Native Plant Society
Ecological Society of America
TOTAL EXPERIENCE
19 years
YEARS WITH CURRENT FIRM
2004 to Present
PURBLICATIONS & PRESENTATIONS
The Future of Rowan Creek Watershed: Connecting
Land Use and Management with Water Quality.
2003. Water Resources Management Workshop
2002, Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental
Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
The Tumultuous World of Drainage Districts: An
Analysis of Existing Management Arrangements,
with Recommendations. Working Paper Series
2002-1. Water Resources Institutions and Policies,
Department of Urban and Regional Planning,
University of Wisconsin, Madison.
South Shore Lake Bemidji Remediation &
Restoration, Society of American Military Engineers
meeting June 22, 2016, St Paul, MN.
SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE
Benjamin Hodapp, an Environmental Specialist and Senior Project Manager,
brings a broad background of knowledge and experience in the environmental
field to the Anderson Engineering team. Benjamin has a unique combination of
multi-disciplinary academic training and work experience at various levels of
federal, state and local government and private consulting.
Benjamin’s project experience includes natural resource inventory and
assessment; wetland delineation, mitigation design and monitoring; regulatory
permitting; agency and stakeholder coordination; environmental impact
assessment, environmental document preparation and public outreach.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
Southwest Light Rail Transit- Metropolitan Council – Minneapolis, MN:
Project manager for wetland delineation and permitting efforts in support of
multi-disciplinary consultant team for preparation of Final Environmental
Impact Statement for proposed 16 mile light rail alignment. Project tasks
included completion of wetland delineations, preparation of all federal, state
and local wetland permits and wetland mitigation plans, quality assurance and
quality control of all deliverable products.
Harriet Island to South St. Paul Regional Trail – City of St Paul, City of South
St. Paul and Dakota County – St Paul, MN: Project manager for wetland
delineation, mapping and assessment efforts in support of multi -disciplinary
consultant team responsible for preliminary engineering and final design.
Project tasks included project management oversight and coordination,
supervising field staff in completion of both off-site and on-site wetland
determinations, boundary delineations, GPS mapping and functional
assessments. Oversaw preparation of and responsible for quality assurance
and quality control of all deliverable products.
Crosstown Blvd. Pedestrian Trail – City of Andover – Andover, MN: Project
Manager for wetland delineation associated with proposed City trai l
improvements. Services included a wetland delineation, GPS mapping and
functional assessment document findings and coordination and approval of
findings with federal, state and local regulatory agencies.
Bennett Family Park Improvements – Minnetonka, MN: Project Manager for
wetland delineation associated with proposed baseball complex improvements.
Services included a wetland delineation, GPS mapping and functional
assessment document findings and coordination and approval of findings with
federal, state and local regulatory agencies.
Section 401/404 Wetland Permitting – Fort McCoy Commemorative Park
Expansion – Fort McCoy, WI: Provided project management services for
Section 401/404 permitting associated with proposed wetland impacts
resulting from the Commemorative Park Expansion Project at the Fort McCoy
U.S. Army installation. Project tasks included project management, developing
a wetland mitigation strategy in compliance with Section 401/404 and state
wetland permitting requirements and oversight and quality control in
preparing Section 401/404 permit application.
Joseph L. Aden
GIS Specialist / Survey Technician
13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
EDUCATION
Geomatics Advanced
Technical Certificate
St. Paul College
SPECIALIZED TRAINING
ESRI Online/Classroom Training
Certified Trimble GPS/GIS Training
Conservation Applications of
LiDAR Data, U of M
OSHA 10 Hour Training Course in
Construction Safety and Health
TOTAL EXPERIENCE
11 years
YEARS WITH CURRENT FIRM
2007 to Present
SUMMARY OF EXERIENCE
Joseph Aden, GIS/Survey Technician, maintains thorough working knowledge
of land survey systems and Geographical Information Systems. Joseph has a
unique combination of experience with spatial analysis and mapping along
with extensive field data collection via traditional land survey techniques, GPS
mapping, and other data acquisition methods. This allows him to recognize
and manage the specific spatial demands in the most efficient manner while
anticipating the end users’ expectations. Joseph provides data collection,
mapping and analysis for a wide array of projects.
Joseph’s project experience includes GIS mapping and analysis, hydrographic
surveys, wetland delineation and location surveys. Joseph has training and
experience with Global Positioning Systems (GPS), Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) and AutoCAD.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
Southwest Light Rail Transit FEIS - Metropolitan Council - Minneapolis,
Minnesota: Wetland and permitting efforts in support of multi-disciplinary
consultant team for preparation of Final Environmental Impact Statement for
proposed 16-mile light rail alignment. Project tasks included wetland
delineation mapping, environmental impact analysis, GIS graphics support and
support with gathering information for the FEIS.
South Shore Lake Bemidji – City of Bemidji – Bemidji, Minnesota: Provide
environmental and restoration engineering services to the City of Bemidji
related to the contaminated soil and sediment cleanup and ecological
restoration of the South Shore of Lake Bemidji. Project tasks included field
collected data management, mapping and graphics support.
Rydell National Wildlife Refuge - US Fish and Wildlife – Erskine, Minnesota:
Prepare an inventory of existing trail system areas in need of rehabilitation or
reconstruction. Project tasks included field collected data management,
mapping and GIS graphics support.
ERX Motor Park EAW– Elk River, Minnesota: Preparation of an EAW for the ERX
Motor Park. Project tasks included wetland delineation, environmental impact
analysis, field collected data management, mapping and graphics support.
GIS SERVICES
Assist in-house managers and staff with a variety of mapping and analysis
support including: providing site specific aerial photography, project boundary
mapping, creating engineering and survey figures, creating wetland
delineation figures, obtaining utility information, managing and manipulating
raw field data, spatial datasets, and providing quality assessment and controls
for attribute and metadata.
Alex Yellick
Environmental Associate
13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
EDUCATION
MS Environmental & Conservation
Sciences
North Dakota State University
BS Biological Sciences
North Dakota State University
SPECIALIZED TRAINING
Construction Stormwater Site
Management – MnDOT
HAZWOPER 40-hour Training
TOTAL EXPERIENCE
4 years
YEARS WITH CURRENT FIRM
2018 to present
SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE
Alex Yellick, an Environmental Associate, brings a broad range of knowledge and
experience in the environmental field to the Anderson Engineering team. Prior to
his employment with Anderson Engineering of MN, LLC, Alex worked as a certified
wetland delineator and has background in biologic assessments, regulatory
review/permitting and Phase I Environmental Site Assessments. The skills that Alex
developed through his educational background and experience make him
proficient in assessing and addressing a range of environmental issues, and clearly
communicating solutions to clients and various regulatory agencies.
Alex’s project experience includes biological assessments of urban and rural
wetlands, environmental compliance oversight, stormwater best management
practices design and compliance, and Phase I site assessments. Alex has
experience with Global Positioning Systems, Geographic Information Systems, and
AutoCAD.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
Wetland Delineation/Assessment – Various Locations: services included wetland
delineation and assessment of permitting requirements in support of linear
construction projects and real-estate transactions. Project tasks included
completion of wetland field delineations following the 1987 United States Army
Corps of Engineers Wetland Manual and Midwest Regional Supplement, boundary
delineations, GPS mapping, and preparation of reports to document findings and
assess wetland impacts.
Permitting and Compliance Activities – Minnesota, Arkansas, Mississippi,
Oklahoma, and Texas: Services included environmental permitting and
operational compliance assistance associated with linear project construction and
maintenance activities. Project tasks included assessment of proposed project
environmental impacts to Federal and State regulated waters, floodplains,
threatened and endangered species, historic properties, air quality, and local
jurisdictional requirements, and preparation of permit applications and associated
materials.
Stormwater Permitting and Compliance Activities – Greater Minneapolis-St. Paul
Metropolitan Area: Provided National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
permitting and compliance support to linear construction project activities. Project
tasks consisted of evaluating project workspaces for appropriate stormwater best
management practices, preparation of stormwater plans/permits, permit
compliance inspections and post-construction restoration inspections, and
preparation of reports to document inspection findings.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment – Various Locations: Prepared Phase I
Environmental Site Assessments of residential, commercial, industrial, and vacant
properties in accordance with ASTM E1527-13. Project tasks generally included
environmental desktop review, regulatory file review, site inspections, interviews,
and preparation of reports to document findings.
Katie M. Ring
Environmental Associate
13605 1st Avenue North Suite 100, Plymouth, MN 55441 P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science in Environmental
Science, Policy, and Management
Minor in Soil Science
Minor in Sustainable Agriculture
University of Minnesota – Twin Cities
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
MN Wetland Professionals
Association (WPA)
Minnesota Native Plant Society
TOTAL EXPERIENCE
3 years
YEARS WITH CURRENT FIRM
2018 to present
SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE
Katie Ring, an Environmental Associate, brings a broad range of knowledge and
experience in the environmental science field to the Anderson Engineering
team. Prior to her employment with Anderson Engineering of MN, LLC, Katie
worked as a lead ecological sampling technician for the National Ecological
Observatory Network (NEON), where she managed the collection and
processing of soil samples in Arizona, New Mexico, and across Alaska. She has
also worked as a Soil Conservationist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service where she helped farmers and
ranchers assess resource concerns and implement conservation practices. The
skills that Katie has developed through her educational background and
experience make her proficient in assessing and addressing a range of
ecological indicators and environmental issues.
Katie’s project experience includes natural resource inventory, biologic
assessments, mitigation design and monitoring, regulatory permit
applications, wetland determinations, wetland functions and values
assessments, floodplain analysis, aerial photo interpretation, threatened and
endangered species analysis, and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
document preparation. Katie has experience with Global Positioning Systems
and Geographic Information Systems.
REPRESENTATIVE PROJECTS
NEPA Documentation – Various Locations: Report preparation experience has
included completing environmental reviews for conservation projects being
implemented through NRCS cost-share programs in Butte County, Idaho and
preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Assessment for the Ohio
Western Reserve National Cemetery.
Wetland Delineation, Permitting, and Compliance Activities – Various
Locations: Services include performing the following general activities in
compliance with federal, state, and local regulations: performing routine
wetland determination and delineations to identify regulated aquatic
resources, preparing wetland permit applications that outline impact
sequencing and replacement/mitigation requirements, and working with
clients to restore areas affected by activities resulting in compliance violations.
Ecological Sampling and Assessment – NEON – AZ, NM, & AK: Project
included field and laboratory sampling and assessments of ecological
indicators including soils and flora.
Appendix E
Notice of Decision – Winkler Land Co. Marschall Road
(City of Prior Lake, dated 6-28-19)
^_
Latitude: 44.699456Longitude: -93.492277
Legend
Project Extent
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 2.11.2019
IScale:1 inch = 0.5 miles
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 1Site Location
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
912.94Spring Lake70005400
1
2
IA-A
Wetland 2Type 1/2/3/4/6PEM1F/C/B/A/PSS1A/PFO1ASeasonally Flooded Basin/Floodplain Forest/Fresh (Wet) Meadow/Shallow Marsh/Deep Marsh/Shrub Swamp13.08 Ac.
Wetland 1Type 1PFO1AFloodplain Forest1.09 Ac.
Ä
ÄÄ
Ä
2
AB
IA-B
Wetland 3Type 3PEM1CShallow Marsh0.12 Ac.3
A
B
C D
BA
E
F
G
IJ
H
Legend
Project ExtentScott Co. ParcelsWetland Field Delineated4/16/2019-4/24/2019Rev. 6/21/2019Sample PointCulvertChannelOrdinary High Water
SOURCE: XX DNR, USDA, ESRI, TIGER, Bing, Scott Co., Anderson Engineering
Project Location
City of Prior LakeScott County, MN13605 1st Ave N #100, Plymouth, MN 55441P 763.412.4000 F 763.412.4090 ae-mn.com
PID: 139-259080010Project No: 15330Date: 6.21.2019
IScale:1 inch = 400 feet
Marschall R oad Land D evelopmentPrior Lake, MN Figure 5Wetland Delineation
Client:Winkler Land Company, LLC
Appendix F
Regulatory File No. 2019-00939-JTB
(Army Corps of Engineers, dated 8-7-19)
BWSR NOD Form – November 12, 2019 1
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act
Notice of Decision
Local Government Unit: City of Prior Lake County: Scott
Applicant Name: D.R. Horton (Mike Suel)
Applicant Representative: Midwest Natural Resources (Ken Arndt)
Project Name: Spring Lake Ridge LGU Project No. (if any): 20516
Date Complete Application Received by LGU: May 11, 2022
Date of LGU Decision: June 20, 2022
Date this Notice was Sent: June 21, 2022
WCA Decision Type - check all that apply
☐ Wetland Boundary/Type ☐ Sequencing ☒ Replacement Plan ☐ Bank Plan (not credit purchase)
☐ No-Loss (8420.0415) ☒ Exemption (8420.0420)
Part: ☐ A ☐ B ☐ C ☐ D ☐ E ☐ F ☐ G ☐ H Subpart: ☐ 2 ☐ 3 ☐ 4 ☐ 5 ☒ 6 ☐ 7 ☐ 8 ☐ 9
Replacement Plan Impacts (replacement plan decisions only)
Total WCA Wetland Impact Area: 0.1182 ac.
Wetland Replacement Type: ☐ Project Specific Credits:
☒ Bank Credits: 0.2365 ac
Bank Account Number(s): 1682
Technical Evaluation Panel Findings and Recommendations (attach if any)
☒ Approve ☐ Approve w/Conditions ☐ Deny ☐ No TEP Recommendation
LGU Decision
☒ Approved with Conditions (specify below)1 ☐ Approved1 ☐ Denied
List Conditions: Provide verification of wetland credit withdrawal.
Decision-Maker for this Application: ☐ Staff ☒ Governing Board/Council ☐ Other:
Decision is valid for: ☒ 5 years (default) ☐ Other (specify):
1 Wetland Replacement Plan approval is not valid until BWSR confirms the withdrawal of any required wetland bank credits. For project-
specific replacement a financial assurance per MN Rule 8420.0522, Subp. 9 and evidence that all required forms have been recorded on
the title of the property on which the replacement wetland is located must be provided to the LGU for the approval to be valid.
LGU Findings – Attach document(s) and/or insert narrative providing the basis for the LGU decision1.
☒ Attachment(s) (specify): Approved wetland impact figure
☒ Summary: D.R. Horton is proposing a new residential development on 84 acres southeast of CSAH 17
(Marschall Road) and CSAH 12 (Shoreline Blvd) in Prior Lake. The project intends to construct 99 single-family
lots with associated public roads, utilities, site amenities, and stormwater ponding. The project proposes 5,152
sq ft (0.1182 ac) of permanent impact to 1 wetland for construction of the public roadway within the site. An
additional 6,526 sq ft (0.1498 ac) of wetland will be temporarily impacted for construction of the trunk sewer
line.
BWSR NOD Form – November 12, 2019 2
The TEP met on June 1, 2022 to review the project and were in agreement with the avoidance and
minimization efforts provided. Replacement is proposed via the purchase of 0.2365 ac of wetland credits from
Wetland Bank No. 1682 in Scott County. The replacement meets the siting criteria.
1 Findings must consider any TEP recommendations.
Attached Project Documents
☒ Site Location Map ☒ Project Plan(s)/Descriptions/Reports (specify): Approved impact figure
Appeals of LGU Decisions
If you wish to appeal this decision, you must provide a written request within 30 calendar days of the date you
received the notice. All appeals must be submitted to the Board of Water and Soil Resources Executive Director
along with a check payable to BWSR for $500 unless the LGU has adopted a local appeal process as identified
below. The check must be sent by mail and the written request to appeal can be submitted by mail or e-mail.
The appeal should include a copy of this notice, name and contact information of appellant(s) and their
representatives (if applicable), a statement clarifying the intent to appeal and supporting information as to why
the decision is in error. Send to:
Appeals & Regulatory Compliance Coordinator
Minnesota Board of Water & Soils Resources
520 Lafayette Road North
St. Paul, MN 55155
travis.germundson@state.mn.us
Does the LGU have a local appeal process applicable to this decision?
☒ Yes1 ☐ No
1If yes, all appeals must first be considered via the local appeals process.
Local Appeals Submittal Requirements (LGU must describe how to appeal, submittal requirements, fees, etc. as applicable)
Send a petition to: City of Prior Lake, 4646 Dakota Street SE, Prior Lake, MN 55372
Notice Distribution (include name)
Required on all notices:
☒ SWCD TEP Member: Collin Schoenecker ☒ BWSR TEP Member: Ben Carlson
☒ LGU TEP Member (if different than LGU contact): Alison Harwood, WSB
☒ DNR Representative: Mark Nemeth, Taylor Huinker
☒ Watershed District or Watershed Mgmt. Org.: PLSLWD (Allison Weyer)
☒ Applicant: Mike Suel ☒ Agent/Consultant: MNR (Ken Arndt)
Optional or As Applicable:
☐ Corps of Engineers:
☐ BWSR Wetland Mitigation Coordinator (required for bank plan applications only):
☒ Members of the Public (notice only): Eric Trelstad, Wetland Credit Agency ☐ Other:
Signature: Date:
This notice and accompanying application materials may be sent electronically or by mail. The LGU may opt to send a
summary of the application to members of the public upon request per 8420.0255, Subp. 3.
S:\Water Resources\01 Wetland Program\WCA Sites\Spring Lake Ridge\NOD - impacts\MEMO - PYoung - Spring Lake Ridge Council Recommendation -
060922.docx 540 GATEWAY BLVD | BURNSVILLE, MN | 55337 | 952.737.4660 | WSBENG.COM Memorandum
To: Pete Young, City of Prior Lake
From: Alison Harwood, WSB
Date: June 9, 2022
Re: Council Recommendation – Spring Lake Ridge Wetland Replacement Plan
WSB Project No. 20516
The applicant (D.R. Horton) submitted a complete Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) application
for a replacement plan for the Spring Lake Ridge development. The site is located on
approximately 84 acres southeast of CSAH 17 (Marschall Road) and CSAH 12 (Shoreline Blvd).
The project intends to construct 99 single-family lots with associated public roads, utilities, site
amenities, and stormwater ponding. The project will result in a total of 5,152 square feet
(approximately 0.1182 acre) of permanent wetland impacts to 1 wetland. The proposed impacts
will result from construction of a public roadway through the site. An additional 6,526 sq ft (0.1498
ac) of wetland will be temporarily impacted for construction of the trunk sewer line.
The application was noticed to the WCA Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) on May 17, 2022. The
TEP is advisory in nature and makes technical findings and recommendations. TEP members
include representatives from the City, Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), the Scott Soil
and Water Conservation District (SWCD), and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
(DNR). Comments were allowed until June 8, 2022. The TEP met June 1, 2022 to review the
project and proposed wetland impacts. The TEP was supportive of the replacement plan and
recommended approval.
D.R. Horton will replace wetland impacts at a 2:1 ratio by purchasing credits from an approved
wetland bank within the same Bank Service Area (BSA), which meets the replacement plan siting
requirements of WCA. The total amount of wetland replacement provided will be 10,304 square
feet (approximately 0.2365 acre).
On behalf of the City of Prior Lake, Local Government Unit for the Wetland Conservation Act, I
recommend that the City Council approves the wetland replacement plan for the Spring Lake
Ridge development. As a condition of approval, the applicant will be required to provide
verification of wetland credit purchase from the Board of Water and Soil Resources . A Notice of
Decision is attached for review.
Page 1 of 9
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS
Adopted May 16, 1994
Amended January 3, 1995
Amended June 19, 1995
Amended January 2, 1996
Amended January 6, 1997
Amended February 16, 1999
Amended June 7, 1999
Amended June 26, 2006
Amended November 17, 2008
Amended October 19, 2009
Amended January 3, 2011
Amended June 4, 2012
Amended January 12, 2015
Amended January 11, 2016
Amended March 19, 2018
Amended June 20, 2022
SECTION 100: PURPOSE
101: The purpose of the Planning Commission bylaws is to provide a set of operating
procedures for the Planning Commission, and to establish a code of ethics and conduct.
102: The Bylaws shall be reviewed annually by the Planning Commission, and any changes or
amendments agreed to by a majority vote of the Commission shall be recommended to
the City Council for adoption at its annual meeting. The City Council conducts its annual
meeting as the first meeting in January of each year.
SECTION 200: STRUCTURE OF COMMISSION
201: COMMISSION CREATED: A Planning Commission is hereby created for the City, its
purpose to be of an advisory nature to the City Council and staff on issues related to
zoning and development, except as provided by State Statute.
The members of the Planning Commission shall annually elect officers in accordance with
the procedures of paragraph 205 herein.
202: DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION: The duties of the Planning Commission are as follows:
1. To acquire and maintain in current form such basic information and background data
that is necessary to an understanding of past trends, present conditions and forces at
work to cause changes in these conditions.
2. To prepare, draft and recommend amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for review
by the City Council on the advice of the City Community and Economic Development
Director.
3. To recommend policies to the City Council for guiding action affecting development.
4. To determine whether specific proposed developments conform to the principles and
requirements for the Comprehensive Plan and City ordinances.
5. To keep the City Council and the general public informed and advised as to all planning
and development matters.
Page 2 of 9
6. To review and make recommendations to the City Council on planned unit
development and subdivision proposals.
7. To hold public hearings for subdivision, planned unit developments and rezoning
applications and furnish the City Council with information and recommendations of
such hearings.
8. To prepare and submit to the City Council within sixth (60) days after the end of the
calendar year, a summary report of all variances granted to applicants from January 1
through December 31 of that calendar year. The summary report shall contain such
information as deemed necessary and requested by the Council.
203: APPOINTMENT: The Planning Commission shall be composed of five (5) members
appointed by the City Council. Only residents of the City who are at least 18 years old
shall be considered for appointment. Said members shall serve three (3) year-terms
beginning November 1st and ending October 31st. In addition to the membership
enumerated herein, the City Council may appoint up to two (2) alternate members.
Alternate members may attend all meetings and participate in all discussions but may
participate in the voting process (to include the making and seconding of motions) only if
a regular member of the Commission is absent. The Commission shall be representative
of the citizens who live in Prior Lake. Commission members may serve additional terms
upon approval by the Prior Lake City Council, based upon satisfactory attendance and
participation, continued residence within the corporate limits of the City of Prior Lake, and
in accordance with the term limit policy established herein. Commission members may be
appointed at any time throughout the year. If a Commission member is appointed at any
time other than the standard City appointment process in October, the Commission
member shall begin service immediately upon appointment and shall serve as if appointed
in the previous October, serving two full years and a partial year.
204: COUNCIL LIAISON: Annually the City Council will appoint a Councilmember to serve as
a Liaison between the Council and the Planning Commission. The role of the Liaison is to
act as a conduit and resource for information by and between the Council and the Planning
Commission and the Planning Commission and the Council. The Liaison shall make
periodic reports to the Council on the activities of the Planning Commission. The Liaison
shall communicate any Council input on a particular issue to the Planning Commission.
The Liaison shall not participate in the discussion or deliberation of any matter pending
before the Commission, except where the Planning Commission is meeting in a study or
work session. The Planning Commission may, at its discretion, ask the Liaison whether
the Council has discussed the subject under consideration and the nature of the
discussion. The Liaison shall never use this occasion as an opportunity to communicate
their personal position regarding the matter under consideration.
A Liaison may always testify or submit written comments at a Public Hearing in their
capacity as a private citizen so long as they make clear at the beginning of their testimony
or their written comments that they are speaking on their own behalf and not on behalf of
the Council.
205: VACANCIES: If an appointed member, or alternate member, of the Commission resigns,
is terminated, reaches a term limit, or otherwise vacates a seat of the Commission, the
Prior Lake City Council shall appoint a replacement in the following manner:
1. Applications are solicited. A notice of the vacancy is made public and individuals may
be encouraged to consider the position. The notice shall state the deadline for
submitting applications.
Page 3 of 9
2. Screening Committee. The City Manager or his designee, the City Council liaison to
the commission, the staff liaison to the commission, and one member of the
commission appointed by majority vote of the commission shall serve as the Screening
Committee. An individual subject to reappointment may not sit on the screening
committee.
3. Appointment. The Screening Committee shall interview all candidates who have
applied for appointment or reappointment and make a recommendation to the City
Council. The recommendation of the Screening Committee will be presented to the
City Council. The Council may accept or reject the recommendation. If the
recommendation is rejected, the City Council may appoint another individual or reopen
the application period and invite new candidates to apply.
206: OFFICERS: The Planning Commission shall elect from among its membership a chair and
vice-chair. The Community and Economic Development Director shall act as secretary of
the Commission.
1. Chair: The Chair shall be elected by majority vote of the Planning Commission prior to
the first meeting in November. The term of the chair shall begin in November and run
for one year. The duties of the chair shall include approval of meeting agendas,
presiding at meetings, participating with the City Council in the selection of
Commission members, semi-annual reporting to the City Council on all information
collected under paragraph 202 and shall give an accounting of its activities and any
information the Commission may consider relevant before the City Council annually or
as directed otherwise.
2. Vice-Chair: The vice-chair shall be selected annually by the Commission and shall
perform the duties of the Chair in his/her absence. The vice-chair shall assume such
other duties as assigned by the chair.
3. Secretary: The Secretary shall be responsible for recording and compiling a written
summary of all official activities of the Planning Commission.
4. Vacancy: If the office of Chair or Vice-Chair becomes vacant, the Commission shall
appoint a replacement by majority vote of those members present at the next regular
meeting, and such election shall be for the unexpired term of said office.
207: TERM LIMIT: It is the policy of the Prior Lake City Council to impose a three term (9 year)
service limitation for all appointed positions to the Planning Commission. Partial terms do
not count toward the term limitation. The purpose of the term limit policy is to encourage
resident participation on City advisory bodies and provide community members with the
opportunity to participate in their local government.
208: REMOVAL OF MEMBER: Any member of the Planning Commission may be removed
from office by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the entire City Council for reasons including but not
limited to: (i) failure to attend a minimum of 75% of meetings; (ii) failure to attend site
visits/inspections; (iii) failure to review and understand agenda materials; (iv) failure to
participate in an appropriate and productive manner; (v) failure to continue to meet any
requirement set forth in Section 203; and (vi) failure to comply with any provision of these
bylaws or any federal, state or local rule or regulation.
209: STAFF LIAISON: The Mayor shall appoint one or more staff liaisons to serve on the
Commission. The staff liaison shall schedule meetings and provide information at the
direction of the Commission. The staff liaison may provide information on the staffs’
position at the request of the Commission but shall not direct the Commission or advocate
for a position.
Page 4 of 9
SECTION 300: STATEMENT OF ETHICS
301: POLICY STATEMENT: The City of Prior Lake recognizes our system of democratic
representative government is dependent in large measure, upon people having trust and
confidence in their public officials. The public rightfully expects governmental officials will
conduct City of Prior Lake business in ways which benefit the public good generally and
that public office will not be used chiefly or improperly to advance personal interests. The
City Council of Prior Lake has pledged the goals of fair, efficient and honest government
will be fostered and that it will strive for integrity and objectivity from all of its officials.
1. The City of Prior Lake finds that the proper operation of democratic representative
government requires that:
• Elected and appointed officials be independent, impartial and responsible to the
people;
• Governmental decisions and policy are made in the proper channels of the
governmental structure;
• Public office and position not be used for personal gain; and
• The public have confidence in the integrity of its government.
2. The City of Prior Lake shall adhere to the highest ethical standards that enhance the
public trust in local government by:
• Creating transparency in its actions through honest and open communication;
• Basing decisions and adopting public policies based on what is in the best interest
of the public and the overall community;
• Supporting the public’s right to know the public’s business; and
• Exercising fairness, optimism, responsiveness and respect in communicating with
the public.
• Providing a forum and periodic training for public officials and employees to
discuss organizational values that reflect high standards and current conditions
and concerns.
3. This Statement of Ethics shall be liberally construed in favor of protecting the public’s
interest in full disclosure of conflicts of interest and promoting ethical standards of
conduct.
302: CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE: Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 10A
(adopted as the Ethics in Government Act) is incorporated herein by reference. This policy
shall be construed and interpreted in consultation with the City Attorney according to
Minnesota Statutes and case law.
303: GIFTS AND FAVORS: No public official shall accept any gift, including but not limited to
money, real or personal property, services, loans, mementos, food, beverages, or any
other favor or thing, regardless of value, from any interested person except as follows:
1. a contribution as defined in Minn. Stat. Section 10A.01, Subd. 11.
2. services to assist an official in the performance of official duties, including but not
limited to providing advice, consultation, information, and communication in
connection with legislation, and services to constituents.
3. services of insignificant monetary value.
4. a plaque or similar memento recognizing individual services in a field of specialty or to
a charitable cause.
5. a trinket or memento costing $5 or less.
6. informational material of unexceptional value.
Page 5 of 9
7. food or a beverage given at a reception, meal, or meeting away from the recipient's
place of work by an organization before whom the recipient appears to make a speech
or answer questions as part of a program.
8. received:
1) because of the recipient's membership in a group, a majority of whose members
are not local officials, and an equivalent gift is given or offered to the other
members of the group;
2) by an interested person who is a member of the family of the recipient, unless the
gift is given on behalf of someone who is not a member of that family; or
3) by a national or multistate organization of governmental organizations or public
officials, if a majority of the dues to the organization are paid from public funds to
attendees at a conference sponsored by that organization, if the gift is food or a
beverage given at a reception or meal and an equivalent gift is given or offered to
all other attendees.
9. received in exchange goods or services of equal value.
304: USE OF EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES: No public official shall request or permit the
unauthorized use of City-owned vehicles, equipment, materials, property, labor or services
for personal convenience or profit.
305: CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Except as authorized in Minn. Stat. 471.88, a public officer
who is authorized to take part in any manner in making any sale, lease, or contract in
official capacity shall not voluntarily have a personal financial interest in that sale, lease,
or contract or personally benefit financially therefrom. (Minn. Stat. Section 471.87)
306: A public official or local official elected to or appointed by a metropolitan governmental unit
who in the discharge of official duties would be required to take an action or make a
decision that would substantially affect the official's financial interests or those of an
associated business, unless the effect on the official is no greater than on other members
of the official's business classification, profession or occupation, must take the following
actions:
1. Advise the City Attorney of the potential conflict of interest as soon as possible,
preferably before the meeting; and
2. The City Attorney shall determine whether a disqualifying conflict of interest exists.
3. Any Planning Commission member shall orally inform the Planning Commission of the
potential conflict and abstain from any participation in that agenda item if a conflict is
determined to exist.
307: The purpose behind the creation of a rule, which would disqualify public officials from
participating in proceedings in a decision-making capacity when they have a direct conflict
of interest in its outcome, is to ensure that their decision will not be an arbitrary reflection
of their own selfish interests. There is no settled general rule as to whether such an interest
will disqualify an official. Each case must be decided on the basis of the particular facts
present. Among the relevant factors that should be considered in making this
determination are: (1) nature of the decision being made; (2) the nature of the pecuniary
interest; (3) the number of officials making the decision who are interested; (4) the need,
if any, to have interested persons make the decision; and (5) the other means available,
if any, such as the opportunity for review, that serve to ensure that the officials will not act
arbitrarily to further their selfish interests.
Page 6 of 9
SECTION 400: CONDUCTING MEETINGS
401: REGULAR MEETINGS: All regular and special meetings shall be open to the public and
shall be noticed in conformance with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. Regular meetings
may be rescheduled, canceled or changed depending upon unique circumstances and
subject to the approval and consent of either the Chair or Vice-Chair.
402: SPECIAL MEETINGS: Special Meetings of the Planning Commission may be called by
the Chair or any two (2) members of the Planning Commission for the purpose of
transacting any business designated in the notice. Staff may recommend calling a special
meeting but must receive approval from either the chair or two members of the Planning
Commission. Notice of a special meeting shall be provided as required by the Minnesota
Open Meeting Law. At such meetings, no business shall be considered other than as
designated in the notice.
404: AGENDA AND MEETING FORMAT: Business of the meeting will be conducted according
to the Agenda prepared by the Staff Liaison. A memo, report, or brief explanation of each
agenda item shall be included in the Planning Commission agenda packet. The
information provided by staff should serve to inform the Planning Commission of the
subject matter under discussion. The information should explain in detail the staff
comments or work, or state that the staff will present the necessary details and comments
at the meeting.
405: MINUTE PREPARATION. The Staff Liaison is responsible for the preparation of the
minutes of the meeting. The meeting proceedings will be audio-recorded and written
minutes will be prepared. The written minutes of the meeting as approved by the Planning
Commission are the official record of the meeting. The audio recording is intended to
supplement the minutes for the purpose of an " on the record review" in a judicial
proceeding. A DVD recording may also be prepared for the purpose of rebroadcast of the
meeting on the City’s public access cable channel. The following two requirements for "
minute" preparation shall be adhered to:
1. All motions typed in capital letters.
2. List the names of the Planning Commission Members after their vote on each motion.
The official minutes shall be prepared and presented to the Planning Commission at the
next regularly scheduled meeting as part of the agenda packet. The text of the minutes
shall consist of official Planning Commission business conducted while the Planning
Commission is in session. Any comments made at a meeting that are made prior to the
start of or after adjournment of the meeting, or during any recess, shall not be made part
of the minutes. The Planning Commission shall review the minutes and the presiding
officer shall call for any additions or corrections. If an addition or correction is presented,
the change must be specific as to place, paragraph, and sentence, if applicable. The
official minutes shall be corrected to reflect the change.
406: ROLES AT MEETING:
1. All meetings of the Planning Commission shall comply with the Minnesota Open
Meeting law, which requires meetings (with few exceptions) of all municipal bodies to
be open to the public. The City of Prior Lake encourages citizen attendance. Public
attendance at meetings of the Planning Commission helps to develop a more
enlightened, interested and participatory citizenry.
Page 7 of 9
2. Any Planning Commission member may recognize a member of the public for the
purpose of asking question(s) relating to the matter under consideration by the
Planning Commission. Members of the Planning Commission must use judgment and
discretion when recognizing members of the public to answer a question during the
time they have the floor.
3. Members of the Planning Commission may also ask questions of staff in order to clarify
their understanding of the relevant information necessary to make an informed
judgment. In preparation for Planning Commission meetings, Planning Commission
members may want to consider contacting the Staff Liaison, in sufficient time prior to
the meeting, to advise the question they intend to ask in order for the Staff Liaison to
attempt to bring the additional information to the Planning Commission meeting.
4. The Chair shall be the presiding officer at all meetings. If the Chair is absent, the Vice-
Chair shall preside at the meeting. If the Chair and the Vice-Chair are both absent, the
Secretary shall call the meeting to order and preside until such time as the Planning
Commission elects among itself a member to preside at the meeting. The presiding
officer, at all times, shall be allowed to vote in the same manner as all other members
of the Planning Commission.
5. The presiding officer has two unique powers: interpreting and applying the rules of
procedure; and recognizing speakers from the audience. That official shall have the
obligation to be impartial and objective in conducting the meeting.
6. The presiding officer shall recognize all speakers from the audience, except when a
member of the Planning Commission has the floor and they expressly recognize a
member of the audience who desires to speak on the issue under consideration.
7. The presiding officer has the responsibility to facilitate discussion by the Planning
Commission. This may occur in a variety of ways, including:
• Interpret and apply rules of procedure
• Decide whether motions are properly made.
• Decide whether motions are in order.
• Decide whether questions of special privilege ought to be granted.
• Decide when to recognize speakers.
• Call for motions or recommend motions.
• Expel disorderly persons from the meeting.
• Enforce speaking procedures.
8. The presiding officer is responsible for maintaining order at the meetings. Although
meetings must be open to the public, no person who is noisy or unruly has a right to
remain in the Council Chambers. When individuals abuse their rights to be present,
the presiding officer, subject to overrule by the Planning Commission, can order their
removal from the room.
407: PUBLIC HEARING FORMAT. Public Hearings shall be conducted in the following manner:
1. The presiding officer announces the agenda item that is the subject of the public
hearing.
2. It is the intent of the Planning Commission to open all public hearings at the time
indicated in the public hearing notice, or as soon as possible thereafter. From a
practical standpoint, not all hearings can be opened at their designated time. The
Planning Commission may delay the start of a hearing until the pending business is
acted upon. However under no circumstances may a public hearing be opened prior
to the time specified in the notice and published in the official newspaper.
3. Staff and/or a consultant make a presentation or report on the subject matter of the
public hearing.
Page 8 of 9
4. At the conclusion of any presentation or remarks by staff and/or a consultant, the
presiding officer asks the Planning Commission members if they have questions of the
staff or consultant.
5. The presiding officer requests a motion and second from a member of the Planning
Commission to open the public hearing and calls for a vote.
6. The presiding officer declares the public hearing opened, announces the time and then
proceeds to ask for citizen input, comments and questions.
7. After all persons have been heard, the presiding officer will ask whether there are any
other persons in attendance who want to be heard on the matter pending. The
presiding officer will request a motion to close the public hearing or to continue the
public hearing to a date and time certain.
8. Once the public hearing is closed, the Planning Commission addresses the subject
matter through deliberation. The Planning Commission may ask questions of the staff
and City Attorney. Planning Commission members should refrain from calling upon a
member of the public except for the sole purpose of asking a question that can be
answered by a “yes” or “no” response.
9. Once the deliberations are complete, the presiding officer requests a motion on the
matter at hand.
408: QUORUM AND VOTING: At each meeting, a majority of all the members appointed (e.g.
three out of five, four out of six) shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
In the event a regular member(s) of the Commission is absent, an alternate member(s)
shall fulfill the role of a regular member(s).
The voting options available to the Planning Commission when a vote has been initiated
are: aye (affirmative); nay (negative vote); and a qualified abstention. When a vote is to
be taken, the presiding officer shall first call for the ayes, then the nays, and if applicable,
shall call for abstentions. The votes of each member shall be recorded in the minutes. If a
member of the Planning Commission is absent during a vote, the member’s vote for the
official minutes shall read as “absent”.
SECTION 500: MOTIONS AND RESOLUTIONS
501: The Planning Commission may take formal action in one or two methods - motions, or
resolutions. All motions in any form require a second unless otherwise stated below. All
votes of the Planning Commission in any of the two methods require a majority vote for
approval unless otherwise specified below or prescribed by statute.
502: MOTIONS: A motion is a matter of parliamentary procedure. Motions are a formal method
of bringing business before the Commission and for stating propositions on which a
decision will have to be made. Motions may be used to introduce resolutions, to amend
them, and to take any other actions concerning them. Motions may also be used for action
on simple administrative acts, such as approving the monthly department reports, or
directing the Community Development/Natural Resources staff. Every motion shall be
stated in full and be reasonably understood, to the extent practical, before it is submitted
to a vote by the presiding officer.
503: RESOLUTIONS: Resolutions are normally used to reflect the Planning Commission
position on items of business that do not require or warrant an ordinance. Resolutions may
be enacted on a motion, which has been duly seconded, and received majority vote. The
Community Development/ Natural Resources Director will maintain a record of all
Page 9 of 9
resolutions and will be responsible for the proper numbering and execution of each
resolution adopted by the Planning Commission.
SECTION 600: SCOPE OF POWERS AND DUTIES
601: POWERS AND DUTIES: The Commission shall act in an advisory capacity to the Prior
Lake City Council and shall advise the City Council on issues related to zoning and
development identified in Section 200, except as provided by State Statute, or as assigned
to the commission. The Commission Chair shall give an accounting of the Commission’s
activities with respect to its goals and objectives before the City Council. Additionally,
specific powers, duties and responsibilities may be assigned to the Commission upon
approval of the City Council.
602: SUBCOMMITTEES: The Commission may divide its membership into Subcommittees as
it deems necessary to implement its goals and objectives.
SECTION 700: AMENDMENTS
701: AMENDMENTS: These bylaws shall be reviewed by the Commission annually. The
Commission may recommend revised Bylaws to the City Council for final approval.