Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-8-25 ENR PacketAGENDA CITY OF MAPLEWOOD ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Wednesday, October 8, 2025 6:00 p.m. Maplewood City Council Chambers 1803 County Road B East 1.Call to Order 2.Roll Call 3.Approval of Agenda 4.Approval of Minutes a.September 10, 2025 5.New Business a.Century Ponds Proposed Development, 601 Century Avenue South – Wetland Buffer Variances 6.Unfinished Business 7.Visitor Presentations 8.Commissioner Presentations 9.Staff Presentations (oral reports) a.ENR Commission Calendar 10.Adjourn MINUTES CITY OF MAPLEWOOD ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Wednesday, September 10, 2025 6:00 P.M. 1.CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Lates called a meeting of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. 2.ROLL CALL Rebecca Bryan, Commissioner Present Joanne Cryer, Commissioner Present Benjamin Guell, Commissioner Present (at 6:05 p.m.) David Lates, Chairperson Present Ted Redmond, Commissioner Present Wes Saunders-Pearce, Commissioner Present Staff Present Shann Finwall, Sustainability Coordinator 3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Lates moved to approve the agenda. Seconded by Commissioner Bryan.Ayes – Commissioners Bryan, Cryer, Lates, Redmond, Saunders-Pearce The motion passed. 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES a.May 19, 2025 Chair Lates moved to approve the May 19, 2025, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission meeting minutes as written. Seconded by Commissioner Saunders-Pearce. Ayes – Commissioners Bryan, Cryer, Lates, Redmond, Saunders-Pearce Abstain – Commissioner Guell The motion passed. b.June 11, 2025 Agenda Item 4.a. 2 Chair Lates moved to approve the June 11, 2025, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission meeting minutes as written. Seconded by Commissioner Cryer. Ayes – Commissioners Bryan, Cryer, Lates, Saunders-Pearce Abstain – Commissioners Guell and Redmond The motion passed. 5.NEW BUSINESS a.Energy Smart and BizRecycling Presentations Sustainability Coordinator Finwall introduced the subject. Alex Christianson, Energy Smart Program Manager and Andrew Hilger, Waste Wise Program Manager presented details on the Energy Smart and BizRecycling Program. The Environmental and Natural Resources Commission thanked the presenters for the detail on the programs. The Commission will promote these programs as part of their outreach efforts to help businesses with their energy and solid waste reduction goals. b.Resolution of Appreciation for Nancy Edwards Chair Lates moved to approve the resolution of appreciation for Nancy Edwards. Seconded by Commissioner Bryan. Ayes – Commissioners Bryan, Cryer, Guell, Lates, Redmond, Saunders-Pearce The motion passed. 6.UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None 8.COMMISSIONER PRESENTATIONS None 9.STAFF PRESENTATIONS Sustainability Coordinator Finwall updated the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission on the following: a.Ramsey County Environmental Center Tour Summary 3 b.Capitol Region Watershed District Tour Summary c.Friday Fireworks (Touch a Truck), Hazelwood Park, Fri., Sept. 19, 5 - 8:30 p.m. d.Buckthorn Workshop, Wakefield Community Building, Tues., Sept. 30, 5 - 6 p.m. e.ENR Commission Calendar 10.ADJOURNMENT The meeting ended at 7:19 p.m. ENVIRONMENTAL & NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting Date October 8, 2025 REPORT TO: REPORT FROM: PRESENTER: AGENDA ITEM: Environmental and Natural Resources Commission Shann Finwall, AICP, Sustainability Coordinator Shann Finwall, AICP, Sustainability Coordinator Century Ponds Proposed Development, 601 Century Avenue South – Wetland Buffer Variances Action Requested:  Motion ☐Discussion ☐ Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution ☐ Ordinance ☐ Contract/Agreement ☐ Proclamation Policy Issue: DR Horton is proposing a planned unit development with 133 detached single-family homes and 73 townhouse units on the former Ramsey County golf course located in the southwest quadrant of Lower Afton Road East and Century Avenue South. To move forward with the project, the applicant is requesting approval of a comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning to a Planned Unit Development, wetland buffer variances, public vacation of a wetland buffer easement, preliminary plat, and design review. The Environmental and Natural Resources Commission will review the wetland buffer variances and mitigation strategies and make a recommendation on the wetland buffer variances. Recommended Action: Motion to approve a resolution for wetland buffer variances. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact?  No ☐ Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0 Financing source(s): ☐ Adopted Budget ☐ Budget Modification ☐ New Revenue Source ☐Use of Reserves  Other: N/A Strategic Plan Relevance: ☐Community Inclusiveness ☐Financial & Asset Mgmt Environmental Stewardship ☐Integrated Communication  Operational Effectiveness ☐Targeted Redevelopment The City deemed the applicant’s application complete on September 16, 2025. The initial 60-day review deadline for the land use-related decisions is November 15, 2025. Minnesota State Statute 15.99 allows the City an additional 60 days if necessary to complete the review. The initial 120-day deadline for the subdivision application is January 14, 2026. The City may not extend the subdivision review timeline without the applicant’s approval after that date. The Environmental and Natural Resources Commission reviews wetland buffer variances to rectify impacts by reviewing Agenda Item 5 and making recommendations for possible repair, rehabilitation, or restoration of the wetland buffers. Background: In 2019, Ramsey County announced the closure of the Ponds at Battle Creek golf course. In 2020 and 2021, Ramsey County and the City of Maplewood collaborated on a community engagement process to review potential development scenarios for this property. In 2025, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was completed for the proposed development, and a negative declaration of the need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the Century Ponds Development was determined. Building on this groundwork, Ramsey County identified a potential developer and ultimately approved a purchase agreement with DR Horton to develop the property. DR Horton’s proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) will include a total of 206 dwelling units, 133 of which are proposed single-family homes on two different lot sizes (55’ and 65’ lots) and 73 of which are attached townhomes in four- and six-unit blocks. Each unit has an attached two- or three- car garage. The proposed project's total lot area is 92.23 acres. The site is located along Century Avenue South, between Linwood Avenue East and Lower Afton Road East. It was the former site of the Maplewood Golf Course. The single-family homes are on the northern end of the parcel, with access via Lower Afton Road and Century Avenue South. The townhomes are in the southern portion of the parcel, with access via Linwood Avenue East. Due to wetlands being preserved on the site, vehicle access is not permitted between the two parts of the development. The proposed development includes a 1.73-acre public park and 1.80 miles of public paved trail. Additionally, 47% of the site is dedicated to wetlands and native areas. The project layout creates a green corridor that will be an amenity for the community and will be accessible via a public trail system. A conservation easement over this area will be dedicated to the City to ensure the wetland buffers and native areas are properly maintained. A full background of the project and planning process can be found on the Century Ponds Development Weblink. Wetland Review Wetlands on Site The wetland delineation report identified 14 wetlands on the site. After review by the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District six of those wetlands were deemed incidental, and eight were classified as jurisdictional wetlands. Of the jurisdictional wetlands five were upgraded from the City’s previously classified Manage C to Manage B wetlands, and three remained Manage C wetlands. Additionally, there is a Manage A wetland located within the St. Paul Police Training site located to the west of the development that will impact development on the Century Ponds site. Wetland Ordinance The City’s wetland ordinance requires that no grading, mowing, or building take place within the required wetland buffers as follows: 2 Wetland Management Class Minimum Buffer Width Average Buffer Width Manage A 75 ft 100 ft Manage B 50 ft 75 ft Manage C 50 ft 50 ft Storm Ponds 10 ft structure setback Wetland Buffer Impacts The plans reflect that the City’s required wetland buffer area for the on-site wetlands is 15.39 acres; and 0.08 acres for the off-site wetland (totaling 15.47 acres). Of the 15.47 acres of required buffer, 6.77 acres (43.8%) include existing greens, fairways, and other manicured lawn areas. The remaining 8.70 acres (56.2%) consist of native plants and naturalized areas. Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District had worked with Ramsey County to establish the existing naturalized areas; however, no maintenance has been done since the golf course closed. The applicant is seeking a variance to allow grading and trails within the minimum required wetland buffer, totaling 1.82 acres (11.8%) of the 15.47 acres of required buffer. The applicant states that the impact is to remove existing trails, create new trails, and create a stormwater system that will enhance the overall functionality and aesthetics of the wetlands on site. Per the Wetland Delineation, the wetlands on the property are classified as Manage B, Manage C, and Water Quality Management Pond (WMP). The Wetland Buffer Details table below includes wetlands on the site, wetland classifications, required wetland buffers, proposed wetland buffer areas, and requested wetland buffer area variances. WETLAND BUFFER DETAILS Wetland No. Maplewood Wetland Buffer Buffer Variance 5 C 50 ft 33,381 sf 0 sf 6 B 75 ft 77,761 sf 8,375 sf 9 B 75 ft 18,751 sf 549 sf 10 B 75 ft 7,416 sf 1,562 sf 11 B 75 ft 148,255 sf 14,739 sf 12 B 75 ft 239,874 sf 16,458 sf 13 C 50 ft 18,912 sf 17,827 sf 14 C 50 ft 63,135 sf 15,001 sf Offsite* A 100 ft 107,029 sf 3,504 sf TOTAL 714.514 sf 79,021 sf *This wetland is off the property, but the wetland buffer extends onto the property. The City of Maplewood and Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District designates it as a Manage A class wetland. **The applicant needs to verify if this represents wetland buffers required by City ordinance, or if it represents wetland buffers proposed after development. ***The applicant needs to verify if the requested variance area includes encroachments proposed by the townhouse patios and yard areas. 3 Per the submitted plans, encroachments within the wetland buffer that would be included in the variance are the townhouse patio and yard areas and paved bituminous trails. Details on those encroachments follow: 1. Townhouse Patio and Yard Area Encroachments: Several of the townhouse patios will encroach into the wetland buffers. To ensure these homes have a small, manicured yard behind their homes and patios, staff recommend at least a 15-foot strip of grass on the back side of the townhomes. This will create a useable yard area to access the back of the buildings and patios. The applicant submitted a Patio Exhibit which reflects these encroachments. However, it is unclear if these encroachments are accounted for in the Wetland Buffer Area Variances identified in the Wetland Buffer Details table above. 2. Trails: There are existing paved golf cart trails located within required wetland buffers that will be used as walking and biking trails in the new development. Some of the trails will be removed and rerouted, and additional trail links will be added. The wetland ordinance allows for public trails in wetland buffers if they are designed and constructed with sustainable design methods. To achieve this, City staff recommend a 5-foot strip of grass adjacent new and existing trails outside of the wetland buffers, and a 5-foot strip of grass and a 10-foot strip of native plantings adjacent new and existing trails within the wetland buffers. This will allow trail maintenance and stormwater runoff to filter into the native plants prior to entering the wetland. Required Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan Before the City Council acts on a wetland buffer variance the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission makes a recommendation on the variance and mitigation plans. A wetland buffer mitigation plan is required to include one or more of the following strategies: 1. Reducing or avoiding the impact by limiting the degree or amount of the action, such as by using appropriate technology. 2. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the buffer. 3. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by prevention and maintenance operations during the life of the actions. 4. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute buffer land at a two-to-one ratio. 5. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. 6. Where the City requires restoration or replacement of a buffer, the owner or contractor shall replant the buffer with native vegetation. A restoration plan must be approved by the City before planting. 7. Any additional conditions required by the applicable watershed district and/or the soil and water conservation district shall apply. 8. A wetland or buffer mitigation surety, such as a cash deposit or letter of credit, of 150 percent of estimated cost for mitigation. The surety will be required based on the size of the project as deemed necessary by the administrator. Funds will be held by the city until successful completion of restoration as determined by the city after a final inspection. 4 Wetland or buffer mitigation surety does not include other sureties required pursuant to any other provision of city ordinance or City directive. Applicant’s Wetland Buffer Mitigation Plan The applicants are proposing planting a total of 28.22 acres of native seed throughout the development, including all 15.47acres of the required wetland buffers and 12.75 acres of additional open spaces. Prairie Restoration LLC submitted a native landscape restoration plan for the wetland buffers and open space sites in the development. Areas graded as part of the overall development will be treated with herbicide to kill existing weeds, tilled, and harrowed to provide a smooth seedbed, seeded with native grasses and wildflowers, and mulched with straw and anchor disked/covered with straw erosion control blanket to protect the seeding and enhance germination. The proposed seed mixes are specifically created for Rusty Patch Bumble Bee habitat. Existing naturalized areas that will not be graded will have all invasive woody species removed by flush cutting and stump treating with herbicide, prior to seeding. In areas near water, an aquatic-approved glyphosate herbicide will be used. The upland areas will then be seeded with native prairie grasses and wildflowers adapted to the well-drained, sunny conditions. The riparian areas will be seeded with wetland grasses and flowers that are adapted to the saturated soil conditions. Brandon Bohks, Certified Minnesota Wetland Professional and Natural Resources Project Manager with Bolton and Menk, the City’s contracted consultant for Century Ponds development, reviewed the native landscape restoration plan. Mr. Bohks’ attached memorandum details key comments and recommendations to ensure the plan meets the City’s required wetland buffer mitigation standards. Recommendations include items such as a plan identifying where each seed mix will be applied and a maintenance and monitoring schedule to ensure seed is established. These conditions will be included in the City’s environmental review which is approved by the City Council as additional conditions attached to the development approval. The environmental review attached also details conditions related to tree preservation and replacement, landscaping, in addition to the wetland buffer mitigation conditions. Wetland Buffer Variance To approve a variance the City Council shall apply the findings for variance approval as required in Minnesota Statutes which state: 1. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. 2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant establishes practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. Practical difficulties mean: (1) the proposed use is reasonable, (2) the need for a variance is caused by circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner, (3) the proposal will not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff reviewed the applicant’s justification for the wetland variance and found the request meets the required findings to approve a variance and recommends approval of the wetland variance. 1. The proposed development meets the intent of City ordinance standards in the Planned Unit Development zoning district, R-1S, and R-3C districts and is consistent with the goals of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 5 2. The request is reasonable. The proposed improvements within the wetland buffer enhance stormwater management and increase public access to the development's natural areas. The site has several wetlands, and the proposed development will continue to protect and enhance them while creating a public amenity via a trail system that allows the public to enjoy the natural landscapes on the site. 3. The existing conditions on this property are unique and not caused by the property owner. 4. A conservation easement will be dedicated to the City over the wetlands and native areas. This easement will ensure that wetland buffers and native areas are properly maintained. 5. Overall, the proposed development of this site is in character with the surrounding uses, which include single-family residential areas. The preservation of 47% of the total site as green space provides a natural buffer between the new development and established neighborhoods, creates a green corridor through the development, and adds a public amenity to the community that is accessible to the new development and existing neighborhoods. Commission and City Council Review Community Design Review Board September 16, 2025: The Community Design Review Board tabled the design review for additional information on the architectural design of the buildings. Planning Commission September 16, 2025: The Planning Commission held a public hearing and then recommended approval of the land use requests. Environmental and Natural Resources Commission October 10, 2025: The Environmental and Natural Resources Commission will review the wetland buffer variances and wetland buffer encroachment mitigation strategies and make a recommendation to the City Council. City Council October 27, 2025: The City Council is scheduled to review the land use requests. Attachments: 1. Overview Map 2. Wetland Map 3. Applicant’s Narrative 4. Site Plan 5. Grading Plan 6. Wetland Delineation Report dated March 11, 2024 7. Wetland Buffer Grading 8. Wetland Buffer Grading with Aerial Photo of Golf Course 9. Wetland Buffer Calculations 10. Wetland Buffer and Green Space Calculations 6 11.Trail Impacts to Wetland Buffers 12.Patio Exhibit – Overall 13.Patio Exhibit – Insets 14.Century Ponds Native Landscape Proposal from Prairie Restoration Inc. 15.Native Seeding Plan 16.Landscape Plan – Overall 17.Landscape Plan – Enlargement A 18.Landscape Plan – Enlargement B 19.Landscape Plan – Enlargement C 20.Landscape Plan – Enlargement D 21.Environmental Review by Shann Finwall, Sustainability Coordinator 22.Wetland Buffer Mitigation Report from Bolton and Menk 23.Wetland Buffer Variance Resolution Links: 1.Century Ponds Development Project Review a.September 16, 2025, Community Design Review Board b.September 16, 2025, Planning Commission c.Project Review Background d.Environmental Review Assessment 7 Overview Map - Century Ponds City of Maplewood August 15, 2025 Legend !I Project Area 0 925FeetSource: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Attachment 1 Wetland Map - Century Ponds City of Maplewood August 15, 2025 !IWetlands Manage A Manage B Manage C Storm Water Pond 0 730FeetSource: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Legend Attachment 2 CENTURY PONDS Comp Plan Amendment, Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, PUD Maplewood, MN After extensive community engagement and multiple iterations on the layout, D.R. Horton is pleased to submit this request for approval of Century Ponds. The proposed development consists of 133 single family homes & 73 townhomes, public park & trails and HOA-maintained open space on approximately 92 acres. The site is located on the former Ponds at Battle Creek Golf Course currently owned by Ramsey County. Surrounding land uses include St. Paul Police Training Facility & lower density residential to the west and south, Lower Afton Road & the Ramsey County Correctional Facility to the north, and Century Avenue & high-density residential uses within Woodbury city limits to the east. The goals and objectives in creating this new neighborhood include the following: •A neighborhood layout that is sensitive to the existing conditions, including multiple wetlands, wildlife habitat, cart path/trail system, availability of utilities, topography, ponding and drainage patterns. •Design a walkable environment with sidewalks and trails. •Preservation of trees and buffer to existing homes. •Creation of a city-owned public park. •Provide home styles and pricing attainable to various buyer groups that complement the surrounding neighborhood. This application includes multiple requests for approval, including Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, Planned Unit Development (PUD), Community Design Review Board (CDRB), Wetland Buffer Easement Vacation and Wetland Buffer Variance. EXISTING CONDITIONS Trees. Generally, the site has minimal tree coverage, except along the westerly boundary. The goal was to preserve this natural buffer between the existing and proposed neighborhoods. Attachment 3 Wetlands. A wetland investigation took place fall 2023 and a Notice of Decision was received from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District May 7, 2024. It was determined that there is 10.55 acres of wetlands. The proposed plan shows no impacts to the delineated wetlands. As shown on the plans, there exists a Wetland Buffer Easement in favor of the City of Maplewood around the large wetland in the southwest portion of the site. DR Horton requests this be vacated, as the wetland buffer easement description does not align with the approved wetland delineation. As described, the buffer currently encroaches into planned townhome Lots 18 through 22, Block 8 of the preliminary plat. Ecological Study. An ecological study was completed to locate and quantify the quality and locations of natural areas within the site. The study determined that there is approximately 9.5 acres of existing native area. This is less than the 14 acres that was being managed by the Watershed and golf course prior to its closing. This reduction could be attributed to lack of formal management and maintenance of the natural areas for the last 4 – 5 years resulting in invasive species taking over the native plants. Traffic. A trip generation memorandum was prepared by Alliant in October 2024 to review the proposed accesses onto Century Avenue, Lower Afton Road and Linwood Avenue. The report summarized that the roads have sufficient capacity for this development. Washington and Ramsey Counties continue to review the access points. As shown on the preliminary plans, left turn lanes are proposed on Lower Afton and Century. At the December neighborhood meetings, multiple residents commented about existing traffic on Linwood. There is concern that the townhome units will generate additional backups for vehicles heading toward Century Ave, as well as cut through traffic from Century onto the private townhome road (Waterleaf Way). Residents suggest that access not be available onto Linwood from the townhomes. Per City direction and for emergency access, the access is shown on the preliminary plans. Based on the above comments, further review of the Linwood Ave/Century Ave intersection was completed. No stacking issues were observed with the current conditions. COMPREHESIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Per the City’s Comprehensive Plan, the site is guided for Park. DR Horton is requesting the property be re-guided to low density residential use. The residential use will not only create much needed new housing, but also open space, including park and trail, for Attachment 3 public use. Below is the density calculation per Met Council’s Local Planning Handbook. MET COUNCIL DENSITY CALCULATION Outlot A 35.85 Outlot B 1.68 Outlot C 3.64 Outlot D 1.99 Outlot E pond 1.46 Outlot G 0.35 DR Horton has met with St. Paul Regional Water Services to discuss capacity, routing, and water pressure for the proposed Century Ponds. It is our understanding that capacity and pressure are adequate to meet the needs of this new neighborhood. Watermain is proposed to be extended from the existing service stubs on Lower Afton Road, Mailand Road right-of-way and Linwood Avenue to create a looped system. Sanitary sewer is proposed to be connected to the existing stub in the northwest corner of the property to serve the entire site. An additional option being explored is connecting into the City of Woodbury’s sanitary stub located in the southeast corner (off Century Ave) to serve the townhomes. Discussions between Maplewood, Woodbury & DR Horton are in process. By splitting the sanitary sewer into north and south service areas, it will lead to less construction activities around the central wetland area, allowing for shallower sanitary sewer in the north portion of the site. It will also help with future maintenance. Attachment 3 At the August neighborhood meetings, residents commented about school capacity concerns. As such, DR Horton met with ISD #622 Superintendent Christine Osorio who indicated the school district has capacity for new families. She was enthusiastic about the opportunity of new homes and new families in Maplewood. PRELIMINARY PLAT, REZONING & PUD The Century Ponds Preliminary Plat proposes 206 total homesites. This includes 133 detached single-family homes and 73 townhomes. With a site acreage of 92.23, the overall (gross) density is 2.24 units per acre. The net site area (site area minus wetlands) is 81.68 acres, resulting in a net density of 2.52 units per acre. Note: this is different than the Metropolitan Council calculation, which includes, ponding, public trails, public park and conservation area. There are two lot sizes proposed for the single-family homes. The 55’ wide lots fit DR Horton’s Select Home plans and the 65’ wide lots are for the Tradition Series Homes. The diversity in house styles will appeal to a larger group of potential buyers at varying home buying stages (i.e. 1st time, move-up, move-down). Variety in streetscape will be achieved by the multiple elevation and floorplan options. There are approximately 7 plans with 3 to 4 elevation options per plan in each of the single-family series. The following is a summary of each house type: •Tradition Series Homes (65’ Wide lots) o 55 total homes o 1- & 2-story homes o 1,800 to 3,100 square feet o 3-car garage o Foundation types – full basement, walkout, lookout o Anticipated pricing – upper $500,000s to low $700,000s •Select Homes (55’ Wide Lots) o 78 total homes o 1- & 2-story homes o 1,500 to 2,600 square feet o 2- & 3-car garages o Foundation types – slab-on-grade, walkout, lookout o Anticipated pricing – mid $400,000s to low $500,000s •Townhomes (26’ Wide) o 73 total units Attachment 3 o 2-story units o 1,665 square feet o 2-car garage o 3-bedroom plans o Foundation type – slab-on-grade o Anticipated pricing – upper $300,000s to low $400,000s o HOA to maintained building exteriors & grounds o 32 guest parking spaces Due to the wetlands, the site is naturally divided into north and south sections. The north portion which contains all the detached single-family homes is accessed from Lower Afton Road and Century Ave. The south portion contains the townhomes with access to Century Ave and Linwood Ave. This request includes approval to rezone the property from Farm to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The PUD designation will allow flexibility within the City’s zoning code to create a neighborhood that not only attracts buyers at different price points, but also provides them with desirable outdoor public spaces and areas of environmental conservation. In the case of Century Ponds, reduced setbacks and smaller lot sizes allows the preservation of wetlands, the creation of expansive contiguous natural areas, a meandering trail system and public park. The below table compares the R-1S Zoning Ordinance to the requested PUD standards. Century Ponds PUD R-1S Small Lot SF 65’ Wide Lots 55’ Wide Lots Lot Standards Setbacks Lot Coverage (Max) Attachment 3 R-3C Townhomes 26’Wide Townhomes Setbacks Front 30 Ft 30 Ft (from private road) Rear 20 Ft 20 Ft Sides 20 Ft 20 Ft Dwelling to Dwelling 20 Ft 20 Ft The below table depicts proposed ownership and maintenance of the Preliminary Plat Outlots. OUTLOT OWNERSHIP USE EASEMENTS MAINTENANCE -Ponding -Wetland -Conservation -Public Trail per Conservation Easement -City maintains ponds -Ponding -Wetland -Conservation -Public Trail per Conservation Easement -City maintains ponds TRAILS, PARK & NATIVE HABITAT Century Ponds proposes over 3 miles of public trails and sidewalks throughout the site. The trails and sidewalks offer connectivity to the surrounding neighborhoods and more importantly to the public open spaces, including ponds, wetlands, conservation areas & park. The goal is to repurpose portions of the golf path and wetland crossings where feasible. The trails are shown in outlots that will be owned and maintained by a homeowners’ association. DR Horton proposes to dedicate an easement in favor of the public over all trails in Century Ponds. The proposed public park is nestled among the wetlands near the western site boundary and accessible from the trail system. As shown on the preliminary plans, the park elements include playgrounds, half basketball court, picnic shelter, seating area and an informal open play area. DR Horton will work with the Parks Department to create an attractive space that nearby residents can enjoy. Attachment 3 The proposed Century Ponds includes a plan to re-establish, enhance and create new native areas. In all, the site will contain about 27 acres of natural area in addition to the 14.5 acres of wetlands & ponds. This means that nearly 50% of the site is native habitat, including vegetated areas, ponds and wetlands. In October 2024, Horton met with Friends of Maplewood Nature to consider priorities for the natural areas. The discussion centered on how to improve upon the Rusty Patch Bumble Bee and other animal habitats. It was agreed that the most valuable area to focus on is the large centrally located wetland complex. As such, the proposed plan creates native habitat around the wetlands, as well as other smaller pockets in the northeast & southeast portions of the site. Furthermore, a greenway corridor along the westerly boundary, not only creates a larger buffer for the existing residents, but also additional foraging and habitat area, as well as connectivity to Battle Creek Regional Park northwest of this site. Horton plans to work with Prairie Restorations (or a similar company) in finalizing a planting plan that encourages the Rusty Patch Bumble Bee and other species of wildlife. As the planting plan is further developed, Horton will seek feedback from the Friends of Maplewood Nature and the Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed. HOA & CONSERVATION EASEMENT For long-term maintenance and management of the native vegetation areas, DR Horton proposes that a Master Homeowners’ Association (HOA) be created. It is anticipated that the native areas will be contained in outlots owned by the HOA. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (which is recorded against all properties) would specify the tasks for the ongoing maintenance of these natural areas, which would be a common expense among all the homes and townhomes in Century Ponds. Additionally, a Conservation Easement would be created so these areas remain natural in perpetuity. The Conservation Easement would be in favor of a public entity (i.e. the city or watershed) to ensure the HOA is completing tasks as required to maintain healthy vegetation for viable habitats. The townhomes units would be part of a sub-homeowners association (under the Master HOA). Townhomes are setup as a common interest community. Here, the association would be responsible for building exteriors, private roads and grounds maintenance (mowing & snow removal). The single-family homes would either have their own sub-association or be direct members of the Master HOA. This will be determined at the final plat stage. Attachment 3 PUBLIC BENEFIT In return for relaxing the zoning standards, the following public benefits are realized in Century Ponds: •Housing Options – Multiple housing options that are achievable to a wider range of buyers. •Trails – Meandering public trail system providing connections to surrounding neighborhoods and most importantly to public open spaces. •Land Dedication – Horton will dedicate the public park to the City of Maplewood. •Park Dedication Fees – Horton to pay cash for park dedication. •Public Park – Horton to construct the park without credit to park dedication fees. •Environmental Conservation – Creation of nearly 27 acres of native vegetation to enhance habitat for the existing wildlife, including the Rusty Patch Bumble Bee that can be enjoyed by all Maplewood residents & vistiors. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT As discussed at the July 8, 2024 City Council Workshop, public engagement was important in moving the project forward. DR Horton has hosted multiple meetings over the past 6 months to receive public feedback. Century ponds has evolved to the current proposed plan because of these meetings. Below is the list of the neighborhood meetings: •8/15/24 & 8/21/24 - Neighborhood Meetings o Invitations were sent to owners within about 1,500 feet of the project boundaries. NOTE: city public notices only require 500 feet from project boundaries. o Approximately 80 to 90 attendees at each meeting. o Feedback included concerns about the closing of the golf course, environmental impacts & open space, density, home prices, increased taxes for existing residents, school capacity, traffic impacts, public accessibility. •10/24/24 – Friends of Maplewood Meeting o Identified areas of focus for native vegetation; suggested greenway corridor o Agreed to continue discussions as Horton gets further into planning process. •11/21/24 – Meeting with Abutting Neighbors (shared property lines w/site) o Approximately 25 attendees. Attachment 3 o Purpose of meeting was to understand any current engineering issues (i.e. drainage) with existing homes. o Horton to meet with abutting neighbors prior to development start. •12/12/24 & 12/18/24 – Neighborhood Meetings o Invitations were sent to the same list as the August meetings (approx. 1,500 radius) o Approximately 20 to 30 people attended each meeting o Purpose was to present the revised plan o Feed back included appreciation for changes, tax impacts, public accessibility to park & trail, technical concerns – traffic (especially on Linwood), water capacity & water pressure, stormwater routing & watershed review process COMPLETED STUDIES The below have been completed to date: •Geotechnical Review – March 2024; Test Pits – Dec 2024 •Wetland Delineation – November 2023; Updated April 2024 based on comments from TEP review; Approved May 2024 •Ecological Study – July 2024 •Sound Study – July 2024 •Tree Survey – Fall of 2023 •Trip Generation Memo – Oct 2024 •Linwood Ave Traffic Review – Jan 2025 •Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) – Aug 25, 2025 City Council Negative Declaration •Archeological Survey – Sept/Oct 2025 PROPOSED SCHEDULE Spring/Summer 2025 •Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Fall/Winter 2025 •Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request •Preliminary Plat, Rezoning & PUD Requests •Community Design Review Board Attachment 3 Spring/Summer 2026 •Final Plat •Begin Site Work – Grading, Utilities & Streets Winter 2026 •Begin Home Construction Attachment 3 LO W E R A F T O N R O A D CENTURY AVE S (PU B L I C ) CENTURY AVE S PO U L I O T P K W Y CE N T U R Y C I R PA R K W O O D D R (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) (P U B L I C ) (P U B L I C ) (P U B L I C ) LI N W O O D A V E E (P U B L I C ) CENTURY AVE SVIEW A VIEW B VIEW C VIEW D 1 6 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2118171615141312111098765 4 3 2 1 19 18 1720 2829303132 33343536 37 41 40 3 9 38 22 5 123479111256810 78 6 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BLOC K 1 BLOCK 1 BLOC K 2 BLOC K 2 2 1 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 10 912 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14 23 22 21 24 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 109 12 13 87654321 1423 22 21 24 25 26 19 18 17 16 1 5 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 BLOC K 3 BLOC K 3 BLOCK 4 BLOCK 4 BLO C K 4 BLOCK 5 BL O C K 5 BL O C K 6 BL O C K 7 45 444342 49484746 27 26 25 24 23 4 2 13 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T C OU T L O T E OU T L O T D OU T L O T A 1 3 1 6 1 3 OU T L O T F OUTLOT F BL O C K 9 LO T 2 4 BL O C K 8 LO T 5 0 BL O C K 8 LO T 5 1 PA R K BLUESTEM STREET BLUESTEM STREET AS T E R A V E CLOVER STREET CLO V E R S T R E E T CO N E F L O W E R A V E IN D I G O A V E SUN F L O W E R C T WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F C T HONEY CIR BLUES T E M S T R E E T OU T L O T B OU T L O T G OU T L O T F 50 1 6 91011 14 13 12 13 14 1 5 16 1 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 10 22 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 26 25 24 23 WA T E R L E A F CT WAT WA T E R L E A F C T FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N LEGEND: 15 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T SI T E P L A N O V E R V I E W Attachment 4 1 6 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2118171615141312111098765 4 3 2 1 19 18 17 20 2829303132 33343536 37 41 40 3 9 38 22 5 123479111256810 78 6 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BLOC K 1 BLOCK 1 BLOC K 2 BLOC K 2 2 1 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 10 912 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14 23 22 21 24 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 109 12 13 87654321 1423 22 21 24 25 26 19 18 17 1 6 15 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 BLOC K 3 BLOC K 3 BLOCK 4 BLOCK 4 BLO C K 4 BLOCK 5 BL O C K 5 BL O C K 6 BL O C K 7 45 444342 49 484746 27 26 25 24 23 4 2 13 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T C OU T L O T E OU T L O T D OU T L O T A 1 3 1 6 1 3 OU T L O T F OUTLOT F BL O C K 9 LO T 2 4 BL O C K 8 LO T 5 0 BL O C K 8 LO T 5 1 PA R K OU T L O T B OU T L O T G OU T L O T F 50 1 6 91011 14 13 12 13 1 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 10 OU T LO W E R A F T O N R O A D CENTURY AVE S (PU B L I C ) CENTURY AVE S PO U L I O T P K W Y CE N T U R Y C I R PA R K W O O D D R (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) (P U B L I C ) (P U B L I C ) (P U B L I C ) LI N W O O D A V E E (P U B L I C ) CENTURY AVE SVIEW A VIEW B VIEW C VIEW D ST - 1 ST - 2 ST - 3 ST - 4 ST - 5 ST - 6 ST - 7 ST - 8 ST - 9 ST - 1 0 ST - 1 1 ST - 1 2 ST - 1 3 ST - 1 4 29 FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMI N A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N GRADING LEGEND: GRADING NOTES RETAINING WALL NOTES: CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T GR A D I N G P L A N O V E R V I E W SINGLE FAMILY HOLD DOWN DETAILS: TOWNHOME HOLD DOWN DETAILS: Attachment 5 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 BLO C K 1 BL O C K 1 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 10 9 12 13 14 23 22 21 24 19 18 20 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 23 22 21 24 25 26 BL O C K 4 BLOC K 4 BL O C K 5 OUTLOT E OUTLOT D OUTLOT A BL U E S T E M S T R E E T CLOV E R S T R E E T LOWE R A F T O N R O A D (PUB L I C ) ST-1 ST-2 ST-3 L L W L W L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L 30 FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N GRADING LEGEND: CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T GR A D I N G P L A N - V I E W A Attachment 5 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 18 17 16 15 14 13 19 18 17 20 BL BLO C K 2 BLO C K 2 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 17 16 151110 9 12 13 8 14 19 18 17 16 15 11 10 9 12 13 8765432 1 14 11 10 9 1213 8 7 654321 BLO C K 3 BL O C K 4 BLOCK 5 BLOCK 6 BLOCK 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT D BL U E S T E M S T R E E T ASTER AVE CL O V E R S T R E E T CONEFLOWER AVE INDIGO AVE WER C T BLU E S T E M S T R E E T CE N T U R Y A V E S PARKWOOD DR (P U B L I C ) (PUBLIC) TU R Y A V E S ST-4 ST-5 ST-6 ST-7 ST-8 L L L L L L L LL L L L L L L L L L L L L LL L L L L L L L L L LL L 31 FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N GRADING LEGEND: CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T GR A D I N G P L A N - V I E W B Attachment 5 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 17 37 403938 BLO C K 2 21 654321 BLO C K 3 BLO C K 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT A BLOCK 8 LOT 51 PARK ASTER AVE SU N F L O W E R C T TEM S T R E E T OUTLOT B 1 6 S POULIOT PKWY CENTURY CIR C) (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) CE N T U R Y A V E S ST-8 ST-9 ST-10 ST-11 L L L L W W W W L L L L L LLL L L L L 32 FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N GRADING LEGEND: CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T GR A D I N G P L A N - V I E W C Attachment 5 1 6 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 41 403938 22 5 1 2 3 4 7 9 11 12 5 6 8 10 7 8 6 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 45 44 43 42 49 48 47 46 2726252423 4 2 1 3 OUTLOT A OUTLOT C 1 3 1 6 1 3 OUTLOT F OU T L O T F BLOCK 9 LOT 24 BLOCK 8 LOT 50 BLOCK 8 LOT 51 WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATER L E A F C T HO N E Y C I R OUTLOT G OUTLOT F 50 9 10 11 14 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 10 OUT CE N T U R Y A V E S (P U B L I C ) LINWOOD AVE E (PUBLIC) ST-11 ST-12 ST-13 ST-14 33 FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N GRADING LEGEND: CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T GR A D I N G P L A N - V I E W D Attachment 5 Lower Afton Road Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report Prepared for D. R. Horton by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company, Inc. (KES Project No. 2023-160) November 17th, 2023 Updated March 11th, 2024 Attachment 6 1 Lower Afton Road Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page 1. WETLAND DELINEATION SUMMARY .......................................................................... 2 2. OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. METHODS .............................................................................................................................. 3 3.1 Wetland Delineation ........................................................................................................... 3 4. RESULTS ................................................................................................................................ 4 4.1 Review of NWI, Soils, Public Waters, and NHD Information .......................................... 4 4.2 Wetland Determinations and Delineations......................................................................... 5 4.3 Historic Aerial Review ...................................................................................................... 8 4.4 Other Areas ........................................................................................................................ 8 4.5 Request for Wetland Boundary and Jurisdictional Determination .................................... 8 5. CERTIFICATION OF DELINEATION .............................................................................. 9 FIGURES 1. Site Location 2A. Existing Conditions 2B. Existing Conditions North 2C. Existing Conditions South 3. National Wetlands Inventory 4. Soil Survey 5. DNR Public Waters Inventory 6. National Hydrography Dataset APPENDICES A. Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota B. Wetland Delineation Data Forms C. Precipitation Data D. Historic Aerial Photo Review Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report 2 Lower Afton Road Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Report 1. WETLAND DELINEATION SUMMARY The 88.53-acre Lower Afton Road site was inspected on November 1 st and 2nd, 2023 for the presence and extent of wetland. The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map showed several excavated open water wetlands (PUBGx/PABGx/PUBFx), a large open water wetland (PABG/PEM1F/PEM1C), and several depressional wetlands (PEM1A) within the review area. The soil survey showed Seelyeville muck as the mapped hydric soil type within the review area. The DNR Public Waters Inventory identified DNR Public Water Wetland 62-248 W (unnamed) within the review area, two unnamed DNR Public Water Wetlands (62-439 W and 82-440 W) within 1,000 sf of the review area boundaries, and an unnamed DNR Public Water Wetland within 1,200 sf of the eastern review area boundary. The National Hydrography Dataset showed five Lake/Pond surface water features within the review area. Fourteen (14) wetlands were delineated onsite, as summarized on Page 6 and 7 of this report. Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8 were incidentally created based on the historic aerial review. 2. OVERVIEW The 88.53-acre Lower Afton Road site was inspected on November 1 st and 2nd, 2023 for the presence and extent of wetland. The property was located in Section 12, Township 28 North, Range 22 West, City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota. The site was south of Lower Afton Road and north of Linwood Avenue East, along Century Avenue South (CH 25/72) (Figure 1). The review area corresponded to portions of Ramsey County PIDs: 122822110002 (297 Century Avenue South; 141.04 acres) and 122822440002 (2621 Linwood Avenue East; 37.06 acres). The site consisted of an abandoned golf course, associated paved trails, parking lots, and buildings. The site contained several historic and excavated wetlands. The previously managed greenways were dominated by planted turfgrass and several volunteer species, such as common mullein, Canada thistle, crown vetch, and common tansy. Several portions of the site appeared to Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report 3 have been planted with a native seed mix containing wild bergamot, cup plant, little bluestem, big bluestem, side-oats grama, and Indian grass. Topography on the site peaked in the southwestern portion of the site (1080 ft MSL) and gradually sloped towards to the northwest corner (1010 ft MSL). Fourteen (14) wetlands were delineated within the site boundaries. The delineated wetland boundaries and existing conditions are shown on Figures 2, 2A, and 2B. Appendix A of this report includes a Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota, which is submitted in a request for a wetland boundary and type determination approval from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). This report also requests incidental determination approval for Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8. 3.METHODS 3.1 Wetland Delineation Wetlands were identified using the Routine Determination method described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Waterways Experiment Station, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0) as required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Wetland boundaries were identified as the upper-most extent of wetland that met criteria for hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. Wetland-upland boundaries were marked with pin flags that were located with handheld GPS units with sub-meter accuracy. Soils, vegetation, and hydrology were documented at a representative location along the wetland- upland boundary. Plant species dominance was estimated based on the percent aerial or basal coverage visually estimated within a 30-foot radius for trees and vines, a 15-foot radius for the shrub layer, and a 5-foot radius for the herbaceous layer within the community type sampled. Soils were characterized to a minimum depth of 24 inches (unless otherwise noted) using a Munsell Soil Color Book and standard soil texturing methodology. Hydric soil indicators used are from Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, Version 8.1, 2017). Mapped soils are separated into five classes based on the composition of hydric components and the Hydric Rating by Map Unit color classes utilized on Web Soil Survey. The five classes include Hydric (100 percent hydric components), Predominantly Hydric (66 to 99 percent hydric components), Partially Hydric (33 to 65 percent hydric components), Predominantly Non-Hydric (1 to 32 percent hydric components), and Non-Hydric (less than one percent hydric components). Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report 4 Plants were identified using standard regional plant keys. Taxonomy and indicator status of plant species was taken from the 2018 National Wetland Plant List (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2018. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.3, Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH). 4. RESULTS 4.1 Review of NWI, Soils, Public Waters, and NHD Information The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (Minnesota Geospatial Commons 2009-2014 and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service showed several excavated open water wetlands (PUBGx/PABGx/PUBFx), a large open water wetland (PABG/PEM1F/PEM1C), and several depressional wetlands (PEM1A) within the review area (Figure 3). The Soil Survey (USDA NRCS 2015) showed Seelyeville muck as the mapped hydric soil type within the review area. Soil types mapped on the property are listed in Table 1, and a map showing soil types is included in Figure 4. Table 1. Soil types mapped within the Lower Afton Road review area. Symbol Map unit name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Rating Hydric Category 540 Seelyeville muck 1.3 1.5% 100% Hydric 166 Ronneby fine sandy loam 0 0.0% 5% Predominantly 452 Comstock silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 7.2 8.1% 5% Predominantly 342B Kingsley sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 0.2 0.2% 3% Predominantly 504B Duluth silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes 10.9 12.2% 3% Predominantly 504C Duluth silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes 10.9 12.3% 3% Predominantly 504D Duluth silt loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes 7.9 8.9% 3% Predominantly 507 Poskin silt loam 5 5.6% 3% Predominantly 49C Antigo silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes 1.4 1.6% 0% Non-Hydric 153B Santiago silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 22.3 25.2% 0% Non-Hydric 342C Kingsley sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent 4 4.5% 0% Non-Hydric 342E Kingsley sandy loam, 18 to 30 percent 12.9 14.5% 0% Non-Hydric W Water 4.8 5.4% 0% Non-Hydric Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report 5 The Minnesota DNR Public Waters Inventory (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2015) identified DNR Public Water Wetland 62-248 W (unnamed) within the review area, two unnamed DNR Public Water Wetlands (62-439 W and 82-440 W) within 1,000 sf of the review area boundaries, and an unnamed DNR Public Water Wetland within 1,200 sf of the eastern review area boundary (Figure 5). The National Hydrography Dataset (U.S. Geological Survey 2015) showed five Lake/Pond surface water features within the review area (Figure 6). 4.2 Wetland Determinations and Delineations Potential wetlands were evaluated during field observations on November 1 st and 2nd, 2023. Fourteen (14) wetlands were identified and delineated on the property (Figure 2). Corresponding data forms are included in Appendix B. The following description of the wetlands and their adjacent upland reflects conditions observed at the time of the field visit. At that time, some vegetation was still growing, while some had senescenced. Precipitation conditions were normal (typical) based on the three-month antecedent precipitation data for a date of November 1 st, 2023, and above the normal range based on the 30-day rolling total. In the two weeks leading up to the site visit, 1.85” of precipitation fell (Appendix C). Delineated wetland characteristics are summarized in Table 2 (see pages 6 and 7). Attachment 6 Table 2. Summary of Delineated Wetlands - Lower Afton Road WL ID Onsite Acreage Circular 39 Cowardin Eggers and Reed Vegetation Adjacent Upland Vegetation Observed Drainage Features Observed Hydrology Indicator/s Mapped WTL Mapped Soil Type & Observed Hydric Indicator ** 1 0.04 Type 3/1 PEM1Cx/Ax Excavated shallow marsh with a seasonally flooded portion connected via excavated drainageway #1 Dominated by sandbar willow saplings with lesser amounts of cattails, reed canary grass, giant goldenrod. Common buckthorn trees/shrubs, Allegheny blackberry, bush clover, Canada thistle, wild bergamot, cup plant, Kentucky bluegrass, and crown vetch. A culvert inlet to the shallow the NW boundary drained the excavated seasonally flooded portion. Geomorphic Position & FAC-Neutral Test None Poskin silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) & Santiago silt loam (Non- Hydric); Redox Dark Surface (F6) Incidentally Created- Excavated in historic upland 2 0.78 Poskin silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) & Santiago silt loam (Non- Hydric); Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3 0.77 Poskin silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) & Comstock silt loam (Predominantly Non-Hydric); Redox Dark Surface (F6) 4 0.81 Type 5/3/1 PABGx/ PEM1Cx/ PEM1Ax Excavated shallow open water wetland with a shallow marsh flooded drainageway (#2) reed canary grass, woolgrass, purple loosestrife, northern bugleweed, and blue vervain. Canada goldenrod, Indian grass, common tansy, wild bergamot, ground ivy, New England aster, common mullein, little bluestem, and bush clover. A culvet along the northern wetland boundary allows hydrology to outlet. High Water Table, Saturation, Dry-Season Water Table, and FAC- Neutral Test PABGx Comstock silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) & Santiago silt loam (Non- Hydric); 2cm Muck (A10), Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11), and Redox Dark Surface (F6) Incidentally Created- Excavated in historic upland 5 0.33 Type 3/1 PEM1C/A Shallow marsh with a seasonally flooded fringe Dominated by river bulrush with lesser amounts of reed canary grass, narrowleaf cattail, and Pennsylvania smartweed. Red-osier dogwood shrubs, grass- leaved goldenrod, Canada goldenrod, and curly dock. Wetland 5 continued slightly offsite to the west. Geomorphic Position & FAC-Neutral Test PEM1C/A Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric); Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) and Depleted Matrix (F3) Historic Wetland 6 0.65 Type 5/2/1 PABG/ PEM1A wet meadow fringe and a seasonally flooded portion canary grass, devil's beggarticks, river bulrush, and swamp milkweed. The by reed canary grass. Kentucky bluegrass, Canada thistle, common tansy, knapweed, and common mullein. None. No inlets or outlets observed. Geomorphic Position & FAC-Neutral Test PUBF/ PEM1A Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric); Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Historic Wetland 7 0.03 Type 1 PEM1Ax Excavated wet meadow Dominated by reed canary grass, pennslyvania smartweed, and woolgrass. witchgrass, red-osier dogwood, big bluestem, sandbar willow, Virginia mountain mint, and Canada goldenrod. None. No inlets or outlets observed. High Water Table, Saturation, Dry-Season Water Table, Geomorphic Position & FAC-Neutral Test None Santiago silt loam (Non-Hydric); Depleted Matrix (F3) Incidentally Created- Excavated in historic upland 8 0.23 Type 5/3 PEM1Fx/ Cx Excavated shallow open water wetland with a shallow marsh fringe Primarily open water with a fringe of narrowleaf cattail, sandbar willow, eastern cottonwood saplings, reed canary grass, purple loosetrife, and woolgrass. Kentucky bluegrass, crown vetch, big bluestem, wild bergamot, Canada goldenrod, and paper birch trees. None. No inlets or outlets observed. Geomorphic Position & FAC-Neutral Test PUBGFx Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) & Santiago silt loam (Non- Hydric); 2cm Muck (A10) and Depleted Matrix (F3) Incidentally Created- Excavated in historic upland ** Based on historic aerial review Incidentally Created- Excavated in historic upland Geomorphic Position & FAC-Neutral Test PUBGxType 5 PUBGx Excavated shallow open water Narrow fringe of narrowleaf cattail, woolgrass, blue vervain, and sandbar willow. Kentucky bluegrass, knapweed, wild bergamot, side oats grama, little bluestem, and Canada goldenrod. None. No inlets or outlets observed. Page 6 Attachment 6 Table 2. Summary of Delineated Wetlands - Lower Afton Road WL ID Onsite Acreage Circular 39 Cowardin Eggers and Reed Vegetation Adjacent Upland Vegetation Observed Drainage Features Observed Hydrology Indicator/s Mapped NWI WTL Mapped Soil Type & Observed Hydric Indicator ** 9 0.08 5/2 PEM1F/B Shallow open water with a wet meadow fringe Primarily open water wetland with a fringe of reed canary grass, narrowleaf cattail, blue vervain, and devil's beggartick. Quaking aspen and northern red oak trees, common buckthorn shrubs, kentucky bluegrass, and reed canary grass. Wetland 9 continues offsite to the west.Geomorphic Position, and FAC-Neutral Test PUBF/ PEM1A Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) & Kinsley sandy loam (Non- Hydric); 2 cm Muck (A10) and Thick Dark Surface (A12) Historic Wetland 10 0.91 Type 5/3/2 PEM1F/C/B marsh and wet meadow fringe Primarily open water with fringe of narrowleaf cattails, smartweed, blue vervain, and reed canary grass. Red maple and northern red oak trees, common buckthorn shrubs, Kentucky mullein, curly dock, Canada thistle, and red-osier dogwood saplings. None. No inlets or outlets observed.Geomorphic position, and FAC-Neutral Test PUBGx Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) & Kingsley sand loam (Non- Hydric); Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Historic Wetland 11 2.76 Type 5/3/2 PEM1F/C/B marsh and wet meadow fringe Primarily open water with a fringe of narrowleaf cattail, river bulrush, devil's spotted joe-pye weed, blue lobelia, smartweed, blue vervain, sensitive fern, purple loosestrife, red-osier dogwood shrubs, and reed canary grass. Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, common milkweed, New England aster, allegheny blackberry, virginia mountain mint, riverbank grape, common buckthorn shrubs, quaking aspen and paper birch trees. None. No inlets or outlets observed. Geomorphic Position and FAC-Neutral Test PEM1A Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric); 2 cm Muck (A10) and Thick Dark Surface (A12) Historic Wetland PABG/ PEM1F/ PEM1C/ PEM1A DNR Public Water Wetland 62-248 W 13 0.07 Type 1 PEM1A Seasonally flooded basin Dominated by reed canary grass with curly dock, and Canada thistle. Red maple trees, common buckthorn shrubs, Kentucky bluegrass, common tansy, and Canada goldenrod. None. No inlets or outlets observed. Geomorphic Position and FAC-Neutral Test PEM1A Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric) and Kingley sandy loam (Non- Hydric); Redox Dark Surface (F6) Historic Wetland 14 0.52 Type 5/2 PEM1Fx/B Excavated shallow open water with wet meadow fringe Primarily open water with a fringe of river bulrush, reed canary grass, northern bugleweed, Canada thistle, blue flag iris, and devil's beggarticks. Paper birch and quaking aspen trees, Kentucky bluegrass, Canada goldenrod, and big bluestem. None. No inlets or outlets observed. Geomorphic Position and FAC-Neutral Test PABGX Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric); Depleted Matrix (F3)Historic Wetland ** Based on historic aerial review 12 5.22 Type 5/3/2/1 PEM1F/C/B/ A marsh and wet meadow fringe and shallow marsh and seasonally flooded portions Primarily open water with a fringe of narrowleaf cattail, devil's beggarticks, woolgrass, river bulrush, blue vervain, northern bugleweed, reed canary grass, and purple loosetrife. Quaking aspen, northern red oak, and paper birch trees, common buckthorn, smooth sumac, riverbank grape, Kentucky bluegrass, Rubus sp., Canada goldenrod, and big bluestem. Wetland 12 continues offsite to the west.Geomorphic Position, and FAC-Neutral Test Kingsley sandy loam (Non-Hydric), Duluth silt loam (Predominantly Non- Hydric); Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) and Redox Dark Surface (F6) Historic Wetland Page 7 Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report 8 4.3 Historic Aerial Review A historic aerial review was conducted to determine if any of the fourteen wetlands delineated onsite were excavated in historic upland. Five Ramsey County historic aerial photographs were reviewed (2003, 1991, 1985, 1953, and 1940) (Appendix D). The 1991 and prior photographs represent the site before it was developed into a golf course. No wet signatures (soil saturation, standing water, crop stress, etc.) were observed in the current location of Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8. These wetlands were determined to be incidental and not regulated by the Wetland Conservation Act. 4.4 Other Areas Drainageway #1 is located in the northwest corner of the review area and connects the excavated shallow marsh portion to the excavated seasonally flooded portion of Wetland 1 and then outlets under Lower Afton Road. The channel was unvegetated with a rock bottom and uniform slopes. Drainageway #2 is an ephemeral drainageway along the eastern boundary. The channel was dominated by reed canary grass with lesser amounts of Canada bluejoint and woolgrass. Riprap was placed intermittently. The drainageway sloped gradually downhill to the excavated shallow open water portion of Wetland 4. No other depressional areas with hydrophytic vegetation or wetland hydrology were observed on the site. No other areas were shown as hydric soil on the soil survey or as wetland on the NWI map. 4.5 Request for Wetland Boundary and Jurisdictional Determination Appendix A of this report includes a Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota, which is submitted in a request for a wetland boundary and type determination approval from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). This report also requests incidental determinations approval for Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8. Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report 9 5. CERTIFICATION OF DELINEATION The procedures utilized in the described delineation are based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual as required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. This wetland delineation and report were prepared in compliance with the regulatory standards in place at the time the work was performed. Site boundaries indicated on figures within this report are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. Delineation completed by: Mary Clare McAleer, Wetland/Soil Specialist Minnesota Certified Wetland Professional In-Training No. 5466 Michael Gurrieri, Wetland Professional In-Training Report prepared by: Mary Clare McAleer, Wetland/Soil Specialist Minnesota Certified Wetland Professional In-Training No. 5466 Report reviewed by: ________________________________ Date: November 17 th, 2023 Mark Kjolhaug, Professional Wetland Scientist No. 000845 Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report FIGURES 1. Site Location 2A. Existing Conditions 2B. Existing Conditions North 2C. Existing Conditions South 3. National Wetlands Inventory 4. Soil Survey 5. DNR Protected Waters Inventory 6. National Hydrography Dataset Attachment 6 © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA Figure 1 - Site Location Lower Afton Road (KES 2023-160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 2,000 Feet Legend Review Area Site Boundary Ramsey Parcels State Counties Ramsey Washington Source: OpenStreets Map I-494 Ce n t u r y A v e n u e S o u t h ( C H 2 5 / 7 2 ) Pouliot Parkway Lower A f t o n R o a d Parkwood Drive Lake R o a d Linwood Avenue East Ramsey County Washington County Attachment 6 10 5 0 1070 10 3 0 10 5 0 10 6 0 10 60 1060 1030 1060 1040 1050 1040 10 3 0 10 5 0 1040 105 0 1050 10 30 10 40 10 4 0 103 0 1040 104 0 1060 1000 10 8 0 1020 1050 1050 10 3 0 1060 1060 1050 1060 1050105 0 1050 1000 1020 100 0 1070 10 70 10 40 1000 1040 10 6 0 1040 104 0 1040 106 0 1060 10 3 0 10 5 0 1050 1050 1070 106 0 1000 1050 1060 1040 1060 1070 105 0 1040 1050 10 6 0 1040 102010301040 10 4 0 1060 10 3 0 10 3 0 1060 105 0 10 30 1040 1050 1040 10 4 0 1050 1060 1040 10 3 0 1000 1040 1060 1010 1050 1020 1050 105 0 1030 1040 WTL 2 WTL 3 WTL 4 WTL 4 WTL 5 WTL 6 WTL 9 WTL 10 WTL 11 WTL 12 WTL 14 WTL 8 WTL 7 WTL 1 WTL 13 WTL 1 10 40 10 20 1050 1040 10 40 10 40 10 3 0 1030 1030 104 0 Figure 2A - Existing Conditions (5/25/2023 Google Earth Photo) Lower Afton Road (KES 2023-160) Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 600 Feet Legend Review Area Excavated Drainageway Wetland Culvert Ramsey County Lidar Washington County Lidar D1 D2 Drainageway #1 (143 linear feet) Drainageway #2 (273 linear feet) WL ID WTL Area (acres) Incidental Y/N? RWMWD Management Class 1 0.04 Y -- 2 0.78 Y WQP 3 0.77 Y WQP 4 0.81 Y Manage C 5 0.33 N Manage C 6 0.65 7 0.03 Y -- 8 0.23 Y -- 9 0.08 N Manage B 10 0.91 11 2.76 N Manage B 12 5.22 N Manage B 13 0.07 N Manage C 14 0.52 N Manage C Min. Buffer Avg. Buffer 37.5 ft 75 ft 25 ft 50 ft 12.5 ft 25 ft 10 ft 10 ftWMP WMP= Water Quality Management Pond Required Buffer Classification Manage A Manage B Manage C Attachment 6 !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( 104 0 10 3 8 10 3 2 10 4 4 10 4 8 10 3 0 10 48 1052 10 0 6 10 5 0 1032 1030 1038 1032 10 4 2 10 48 1028 10 5 2 1036104 4 1032 104 0 1044 1046 1030 103 0 1006 1032 1032 1040 1006 102 8 1026 10 3 0 1020 10 4 6 10 4 2 10 5 2 1032 1036 10 46 10 14 10 3 0 105 0 10 3 4 1042 1046 1038 10 2 6 10 32 103 2 1016 10 50 10 3 8 1040 10 48 104 2 1036 1036 1032 1036 103 2 104 0 104 0 1006 1048 1024 1028 1050 1034 1050 1034 1046 1042 1036 1038 10 4 4 10 4 4 1036 103 2 1034 103 4 1034 10 4 2 10 46 1040 1034 1010 1028 1044 1048 1042 1008 1038 1024 10 46 1044 1036 10 1 2 1016 1014 10 40 1018 1026 1030 1036 1044 1042 1020 1040 1032 1036 1038 1038 1042 1040 1022 1038 1026 1024 10 32 1034 10 2 8 1030 1036 SP6-1 SP5-1 SP8-1 SP4-2 SP4-1 SP1-1 SP2/3-1 SP7-1 WTL 2 WTL 3 WTL 4 WTL 4 WTL 5 WTL 6 WTL 8 WTL 7 WTL 1 WTL 1 Figure 2B - Existing Conditions North (5/25/2023 Google Earth Photo) Lower Afton Road (KES 2023-160) Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 600 Feet Legend Review Area Excavated Drainageway Wetland !(Sample Point Culvert Ramsey County Lidar D1 D2 Drainageway #1 (143 linear feet) Drainageway #2 (273 linear feet) WL ID WTL Area (acres) Incidental Y/N? RWMWD Management Class 1 0.04 Y -- 2 0.78 3 0.77 4 0.81 Y Manage C 5 0.33 6 0.65 37.5 ft 75 ft 25 ft 50 ft 12.5 ft 25 ft 10 ft 10 ftWMP WMP= Water Quality Management Pond Required Buffer Classification Manage A Manage B Manage C Attachment 6 !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( 10 4 8 1050 10 4 4 1062 105 2 1056 10 3 4 1048 1052 10 5 0 10 4 6 1048 1048 10 4 8 1042 104 0 10 3 6 10 4 4 106 4 1042 10 5 2 1050 105 0 1056 1052 10 4 6 10 3 4 105 6 1036 104 0 10 4 2 103 6 10 5 0 104 8 104 0 10 42 1050 1046 10 44 104 6 1050 10 4 2 10 4 2 10 4 8 1048 1030 1028 10 80 105 0 1048 1050 1038 1062105 2 1058 1060 10 60 1052 105 0 1062 10 50 103 4 1028 1044 10 5 6 1058 10 7 8 10 32 10 4 8 1058 103 4 10 38 10 42 1038 1032 1056 1058 1058 1076 1030 1042 106 0 10 5 6 1040 105 8 1048 1040 1054 1054 10 74 10 3 0 1060 1056103 6 1056 1054 1054 1048 1042 1042 1050 1072 1046 1050 10 3 4 1052 105 2 1058 1050 107 0 1050 1044 1054 105 2 1046 1054 1036 1044 1068 1042 103 6 1058 1044 10 40 1050 1038 103 2 10 28 1036 1048 1038 1048 1036 1032 10 4 0 1066 10 4 6 1032 104 6 1048 1056 1042 1034 1034 1044 1052 1064 10 4 4 10341054 1050 1034 1042 10 42 104 0 10 3 6 1044 1062 1036 1038 1056 1060 1042 1054 1052 1058 105 2 1048 1056 1038 1054 1038 1040 1052 1040 1050 1042 1042 1044 1046 1044 1030 1048 1042 1044 10 3 2 1050 1048 103 4 1038 1040 1040 104 6 10 38 1036 SP6-1 SP9-1 SP12-1 SP8-1 SP14-1 SP13-1 SP7-1 SP10-1 SP11-1 WTL 5 WTL 6 WTL 9 WTL 10 WTL 11 WTL 12 WTL 14 WTL 8 WTL 7 WTL 13 Figure 2C - Existing Conditions South (5/25/2023 Google Earth Photo) Lower Afton Road (KES 2023-160) Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicated on this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 600 Feet Legend Review Area Excavated Drainageway Wetland !(Sample Point Culvert Ramsey County Lidar SP12-2 WL ID WTL Area (acres) Incidental Y/N? RWMWD Management Class 5 0.33 N Manage C 6 0.65 7 0.03 8 0.23 Y -- 9 0.08 10 0.91 11 2.76 N Manage B 12 5.22 13 0.07 14 0.52 37.5 ft 75 ft 25 ft 50 ft 12.5 ft 25 ft 10 ft 10 ft Required Buffer Classification Manage A Manage B Manage C WMP WMP= Water Quality Management Pond Attachment 6 PEM1A PUBG PEM1A PEM1F PUBGx PEM1A PUBGx PEM1C PUBFx PABG PABG PUBGx PUBGx PABGx PEM1A PUBF PEM1C PEM1C PUBGx PEM1C PEM1A PUBGx PEM1A PUBGx PUBF PEM1C PABGx PABGx PUBGx PUBGx PEM1F PEM1F PABGx PUBGx PEM1F PEM1A PEM1C PUBFx PUBF PEM1C PEM1C PUBFPSS1/EM1C PABGx PEM1F PEM1A PABG PUBGx PUBGx Figure 3 - National Wetlands Inventory Lower Afton Road (KES 2023 -160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product.¯ 0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area PABG PABGx PEM1A PEM1C PEM1F PUBF PUBFx PUBG PUBGx PABG PABGx PEM1A PEM1C PEM1F PSS1/EM1C PUBF PUBFx PUBGx Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USFWS Attachment 6 861C 452 342B 342C 544 153C 342D 342C 264 W 166 342C 153B 342B 153B 504D 342C 264 342B 166 504B 544 W 504C 342D W 342E 504C 504D 153B 153B 861C 342E 342C 452 504D 507 504B 342B 896D W 153B 896D W 507 504B 166 1055 342C 504B 266 153B 49C 504B 342D 896D 504B 540 W 166 504B 166 453B W 166 896C 166 342D 504B 342C Figure 4 - Soil Survey Lower Afton Road (KES 2023-160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area Hydric/Predominantly Hydric Predominantly Non-Hydric/Non-Hydric Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USDA, NRCS Map unit symbol Map unit name 540 Seelyeville muck166Ronneby fine sandy loam 452 Comstock silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 342B Kingsley sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 504B Duluth silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes 504C Duluth silt loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes 504D Duluth silt loam, 12 to 25 percent slopes507Poskin silt loam 49C Antigo silt loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes 153B Santiago silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 342C Kingsley sandy loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes 342E Kingsley sandy loam, 18 to 30 percent slopesWWater Attachment 6 Unnamed (82-440 W) Unnamed (82-441 W) Unnamed (62-248 W) Unnamed (62-247 W) Unnamed (82-439 W) Unnamed (62-235 W) Unnamed (62-235 W) Figure 5 - DNR Public Waters Inventory Lower Afton Road (KES 2023-160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 2,000 Feet Legend Review Area Public Ditch/Altered Natural Watercourse Public Watercourse Public Waters Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, MN DNR Attachment 6 Figure 6 - National Hydrography Dataset Lower Afton Road (2023 - 160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area Hydro Junction ArtificialPath Pipeline Lake/Pond Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USGS Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX A Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota Attachment 6 Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form – Revised May 2021 Page 3 of 12 Project Name and/or Number: Lower Afton Road (KES# 2023-160) 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, Deb Ridgeway Mailing Address: 20860 Kenbridge Court, Suite 100, Lakeville, MN 55044 Phone: (952) 985-7864 E-mail Address: dridgeway@drhorton.com Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above): Mailing Address: Phone: E-mail Address: Agent Name: Kjolhaug Environmental Services; c/o Mary Clare McAleer Mailing Address: 2500 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 Phone: (224) 456-7944 E-mail Address: maryclare@kjolhaugenv.com PART TWO: Site Location Information County: Ramsey City/Township: Maplewood Parcel ID and/or Address: 122822110002 (297 Century Avenue S) and 122822440002 (2621 Linwood Ave E) Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): S: 12, T: 28N, R: 22W Lat/Long (decimal degrees): (44.928513, -92.987635) Attach a map showing the location of the site in relation to local streets, roads, highways. Approximate size of site (acres) or if a linear project, length (feet): 177.79 acres If you know that your proposal will require an individual Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, you must provide the names and addresses of all property owners adjacent to the project site. This information may be provided by attaching a list to your application or by using block 25 of the Application for Department of the Army permit which can be obtained at: http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Portals/57/docs/regulatory/RegulatoryDocs/engform_4345_2012oct.pdf PART THREE: General Project/Site Information If this application is related to a delineation approval, exemption determination, jurisdictional determination, or other correspondence submitted prior to this application then describe that here and provide the Corps of Engineers project number. Describe the project that is being proposed, the project purpose and need, and schedule for implementation and completion. The project description must fully describe the nature and scope of the proposed activity including a description of all project elements that effect aquatic resources (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) and must also include plans and cross section or profile drawings showing the location, character, and dimensions of all proposed activities and aquatic resource impacts. Wetland delineation concurrence/approval. Concurrence on incidental determination for Wetland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8. Attachment 6 Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form – Revised May 2021 Page 4 of 12 Project Name and/or Number: Lower Afton Road (KES# 2023-160) 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 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 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: PART FIVE: Applicant Signature Check here if you are requesting a pre-application consultation with the Corps and LGU based on the information you have provided. Regulatory entities will not initiate a formal application review if this box is checked. By signature below, I attest that the information in this application is complete and accurate. I further attest that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein. Signature: Date: I hereby authorize Kjolhaug Environmental Services to act on my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this application. 1 The term “impact” as used in this joint application form is a generic term used for disclosure purposes to identify activities that may require approval from one or more regulatory agencies. For purposes of this form it is not meant to indicate whether or not those activities may require mitigation/replacement. 11/6/2023 Attachment 6 Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form – Revised May 2021 Page 5 of 12 Project Name and/or Number: Lower Afton Road (KES# 2023-160) Attachment A Request for Delineation Review, Wetland Type Determination, or Jurisdictional Determination By submission of the enclosed wetland delineation report, I am requesting that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District (Corps) and/or the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (LGU) provide me with the following (check all that apply): Wetland Type Confirmation Delineation Concurrence. Concurrence with a delineation is a written notification from the Corps and a decision from the LGU concurring, not concurring, or commenting on the boundaries of the aquatic resources delineated on the property. Delineation concurrences are generally valid for five years unless site conditions change. Under this request alone, the Corps will not address the jurisdictional status of the aquatic resources on the property, only the boundaries of the resources within the review area (including wetlands, tributaries, lakes, etc.). Wetland delineation concurrence/approval. Concurrence on incidental determination for Wetland 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination. A preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) is a non-binding written indication from the Corps that waters, including wetlands, identified on a parcel may be waters of the United States. For purposes of computation of impacts and compensatory mitigation requirements, a permit decision made on the basis of a PJD will treat all waters and wetlands in the review area as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. PJDs are advisory in nature and may not be appealed. Approved Jurisdictional Determination. An approved jurisdictional determination (AJD) is an official Corps determination that jurisdictional waters of the United States are either present or absent on the property. AJDs can generally be relied upon by the affected party for five years. An AJD may be appealed through the Corps administrative appeal process. In order for the Corps and LGU to process your request, the wetland delineation must be prepared in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, any approved Regional Supplements to the 1987 Manual, and the Guidelines for Submitting Wetland Delineations in Minnesota (2013). http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/DelineationJDGuidance.aspx Attachment 6 Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form – Revised May 2021 Page 6 of 12 Project Name and/or Number: Lower Afton Road (KES# 2023-160) 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: Chapter 8420.0105 Subp. 2 D states, “his chapter does not regulate impacts to incidental wetlands. "Incidental wetlands" are wetland areas that the landowner can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the local government unit, were created in nonwetland areas solely by actions, the purpose of which was not to create the wetland. Incidental wetlands include drainage ditches, impoundments, or excavations constructed in nonwetlands solely for the purpose of effluent treatment, containment of waste material, storm water retention or detention, drainage, soil and water conservation practices, and water quality improvements and not as part of a wetland replacement process that may, over time, take on wetland characteristics.” 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: See report. Based on the historical aerial review, the current locations of Wetlands 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 8 were upland based on the 1940, 1953, 1985, and 1991 Ramsey County Aerial Photography. Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX B Wetland Delineation Data Forms Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP1-1UPMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Convex S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 55 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACU 0 0 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 2 1 45 180 50.00% N 0 Cirsium arvense 5 N Solidago canadensis 40 Y FACU (Plot size: 5 ft. Rhamnus cathartica 10 N FAC 15 3.64 70 255 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 25 75 Rhamnus cathartica 15 Y FAC Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status N N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Poskin silt loam 2-4% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 12-24 10YR 3/3 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Loam 0-12 10YR 3/3 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP1-1UP Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Poskin silt loam 0-2% Lat:Long:Datum: Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 1 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. The hydrology has been disturbed by the excavated portion that drains the shallow marsh portion of Wetland 1. The excavation now represent normal circumstances. Y Species Indicator Status 5 5 0 0 0 2.25 100 225 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Phalaris arundinacea 80 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Solidago canadensis 15 N FACU Lycopus uniflorus 5 N Y 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: OBL 80 160 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 15 60 100.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP1-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology X US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP1-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-8 10YR 2/2 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M Silty Loam 8-16 10YR 2/1 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. The shallow marsh portion had approximately 3 inches of surface water. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) 16-24 10YR 2/2 100 Silty Loam US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Santiago silt loam 2-6% Lat:Long:Datum: N N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status 0 0 50 150 0 3.50 100 350 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 5 N FACU Poa pratensis 50 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Solidago canadensis 25 Y FACU Monarda fistulosa 10 N Schizachyrium scoparium 10 N FACU Bouteloua dactyloides N 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACU 0 0 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 2 1 50 200 50.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP2/3-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP2/3-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-12 10YR 2/2 100 Clay loam 12-24 10YR 2/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Sandy loam Gravel inclusions Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of the soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Santiago silt loam 1 to 3% Lat:Long:Datum: Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 2/3 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 90 180 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Phalaris arundinacea 80 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Salix interior 10 N FACW Y 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 90 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 90 180 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP2/3-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PUBGx , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP2/3-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-6 10YR 2/2 100 Loam 6-16 10YR 2/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Free water observed within 12 inches of the soil surface. Surface water was observed within the center of the basin. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 10 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP4-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 113 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACU 3 6 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 3 1 60 240 33.33% N 0 Schizachyrium scoparium 15 N Solidago canadensis 5 N FACU Symphyotrichum novae-angliae Poa pratensis 60 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Lotus corniculatus 30 Y FACU 0 3.46 123 426 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 3 N FACW 0 0 60 180 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Betula papyrifera 10 Y FACU Species Indicator Status N N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Comstock silt loam 2 to 4% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 12-24 10YR 3/3 95 10Y/R 4/6 5 C M Loam 0-12 10YR 3/1 100 Slity loam Sampling Point:SP4-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Comstock silt loam 1-3% Lat:Long:Datum: Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 4 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status 5 5 0 0 0 1.95 108 211 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 3 N FACW Phalaris arundinacea 70 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Salix interior 20 N FACW Cornus sericea 10 N Typha angustifolia 5 N OBL Symphyotrichum novae-angliae Y 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 108 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACW 103 206 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP4-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PABGx , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP4-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-4 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 4-18 10YR 4/2 90 10Y/R 4/6 10 C M Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Free water observed 8 inches from the soil surface. Surface water present in the center of the basin. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP4-2WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 94 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: OBL 80 160 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Calamagrostis canadensis 7 N Phalaris arundinacea 80 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Scirpus cyperinus 7 N OBL 0 1.85 94 174 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 14 14 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 4 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Comstock silt loam 1-3% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 18-24 10YR 3/2 70 10YR 4/6 30 C M Clay No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 6-18 10YR 3/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay loam 0-6 10YR 2/2 100 Clay loam Sampling Point:SP4-2W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP5-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 60 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 2 1 70 280 50.00% N 0 Solidago canadensis 70 Y FACU (Plot size: 5 ft. Phalaris arundinacea 30 Y FACW 0 3.40 100 340 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status N N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 5-8% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 14-24 10YR 4/1 95 10YR 4/4 5 C M Clay loam 0-14 10YR 3/2 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP5-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP5-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1C/A , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 105 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 100 200 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Phalaris arundinacea 100 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Bolboschoenus fluviatilis 5 N OBL 0 1.95 105 205 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 5 5 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 5 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 0-3% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 14-24 10YR 5/1 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M Sandy clay loam No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of the soil surface. About 3 inches of surface water present in the center of the basin. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 7-14 10YR 5/1 100 Sandy clay loam 0-7 10YR 2/1 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP5-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP6-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 110 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: UPL 50 100 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 2 1 30 120 50.00% N 0 Tanacetum vulgare 15 N Centaurea stoebe 5 N UPL Solidago canadensis 10 N FACU Poa pratensis Phalaris arundinacea 50 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Cirsium arvense 20 Y FACU 0 3.18 110 350 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 20 100 10 N FAC 0 0 10 30 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status N N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 4 to 7% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 12 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): 12 Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Compacted Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 10YR 4/4 100 Loam Restricted= Compaction Sampling Point:SP6-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-4 10YR 3/2 100 Loam 4-12 US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP6-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1A , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACW 85 170 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 15 60 100.00% Y 0 Verbena hastata 10 N Phalaris arundinacea 75 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Cirsium arvense 15 N FACU 0 2.30 100 230 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 6 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 4 to 7% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 10-14 10YR 4/2 70 10YR 4/6 30 C M Clay Loam No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. 22-24 10YR 5/1 98 10YR 4/6 2 C M Loam *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 14-22 10YR 2/1 Sandy Loam Burried A Horizon 4-10 10YR 4/2 80 10YR 4/6 20 C M Clay Loam 0-4 10YR 3/2 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP6-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) All but one species FAC or drier. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP7-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 90 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACW 25 50 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 2 2 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Pycnanthemum virginianum 10 N Poa pratensis 70 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Andropogon gerardii 10 N FAC 15 2.76 105 290 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 80 240 Salix interior 15 Y FACW Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status Y N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Santiago silt loam 3 to 8% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 10-24 10YR 4/6 100 Loam 0-10 10YR 3/2 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP7-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP7-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 105 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: OBL 100 200 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Scirpus cyperinus 5 N Phalaris arundinacea 95 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Persicaria pensylvanica 5 N FACW 0 1.95 105 205 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 5 5 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 7 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Santiago silt loam 0 to 2% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Water table present at 8 inches below soil surface. About 2" of surface water present in the center of the basin. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 0-12 10YR 4/2 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M Clay loam Sampling Point:SP7-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) All but one species FAC or drier. Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP8-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 80 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACU 30 60 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 3 3 20 80 100.00% Y 0 Solidago canadensis 10 N Monarda fistulosa 10 N FACU Poa pratensis 40 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Andropogon gerardii 20 Y FAC 30 2.91 110 320 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 60 180 Cornus alba 30 Y FACW Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status Y N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 3-5% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 14-24 10YR 4/4 Sandy Loam 0-14 10YR 3/2 Loam Sampling Point:SP8-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Duluth silt loam 1-3% Lat:Long:Datum: Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 8 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status 20 20 0 0 0 1.75 80 140 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Phalaris arundinacea 40 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Salix interior 20 Y FACW Typha angustifolia 15 N Scirpus cyperinus 5 N OBL Y 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 80 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: OBL 60 120 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 2 2 0 0 100.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP8-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PUBFx , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP8-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-2 10YR 3/1 100 Muck 2-12 10YR 4/2 70 10YR 4/6 20 C M Clay Loam 12-24 10YR 4/1 80 10YR 4/6 20 C M Clay Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) 10YR 4/1 10 D M Clay Loam US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) All but one species FAC or drier. PI > 3 Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP9-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 90 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACU 10 20 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 3 2 60 240 66.67% Y 0 Glechoma hederacea 10 N Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW Solidago canadensis 50 Y FACU (Plot size: 5 ft. Poa pratensis 20 Y FAC 10 3.50 100 350 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 30 90 Rhamnus cathartica 10 Y FAC Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status Y N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 10-12% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 15-24 10YR 3/3 82 10YR 4/6 15 C M Sandy Loam Gravel Inclusions No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 10YR 4/1 3 D M Sandy Loam Gravel Inclusions 6-15 10YR 3/3 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Loamy Sand 0-6 10YR 2/2 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP9-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP9-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1A , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 95 190 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Phalaris arundinacea 95 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Lycopus uniflorus 5 N OBL 0 1.95 100 195 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 5 5 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 9 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 0 to 2% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Free water present at 22 inches below soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Assumed depleted at some depth based on vegetation and water table observed in the sample borehole. Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 6-26 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam Sand Inclusions 0-6 10YR 2/1 100 Muck Sampling Point:SP9-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) All species FAC or drier. PI > 3 Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP10-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 105 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 0 0 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 2 2 5 20 100.00% Y 0 Poa pratensis 100 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Solidago canadensis 5 N FACU 0 3.05 110 335 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 105 315 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Acer rubrum 5 Y FAC Species Indicator Status Y N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 4 to 7% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 18+Restricted No free water or saturation observed within 18 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): 18 Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Rock Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 8-18 10YR 4/4 100 Loam Gravel Inclusions 0-8 10YR 3/2 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP10-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP10-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PUBGx , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 80 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACW 40 80 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Persicaria pensylvanica 15 N Phalaris arundinacea 10 N FACW Typha angustifolia 40 Y OBL (Plot size: 5 ft. Verbena hastata 15 N FACW 0 1.50 80 120 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 40 40 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 10 Climatic conditions are atypical (dry) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 0 to 3% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s): Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) 16-24 10YR 6/2 70 10YR 4/6 30 C M Clay Loam Free water present at 18 inches below the soil surface. Surface water present in the center of the basin. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 8-16 10YR 5/1 60 10YR 4/6 40 C M Clay Loam 0-8 10YR 2/1 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP10-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) All species FAC or drier. PI > 3 Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP11-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 105 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACU 0 0 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 1 1 5 20 100.00% Y 0 Cirsium arvense 5 N Poa pratensis 90 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Verbascum thapsus 10 N UPL 0 3.24 105 340 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 10 50 0 0 90 270 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status Y N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 5 to 8% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 10-24 10YR 4/4 100 Clay Loam 0-10 10YR 3/2 100 Loam Sampling Point:SP11-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Duluth silt loam 0-2% Lat:Long:Datum: Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 11 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Cornus alba 10 Y FACW 60 60 0 0 10 1.52 105 160 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Typha angustifolia 60 Y OBL (Plot size: 5 ft. Phalaris arundinacea 30 Y FACW Solidago canadensis 5 N Y 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 95 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACU 40 80 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 3 3 5 20 100.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP11-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1C , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP11-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-6 10YR 2/1 100 Muck 6-18 10YR 2/1 100 Clay Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) 18-24 10YR 6/1 100 Sandy Clay Loam US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Kingsley sandy loam 10 to 14% Lat:Long:Datum: N N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Species Indicator Status 0 0 20 60 0 3.58 95 340 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Solidago canadensis 65 Y FACU (Plot size: 5 ft. Poa pratensis 15 N FAC Cornus alba 10 N Andropogon gerardii 5 N FAC N 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 95 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACW 10 20 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 1 0 65 260 0.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP12-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP12-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-8 10YR 3/2 100 Loam 8-24 10YR 4/4 100 Sandy Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP12-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PABG , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 107 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: OBL 65 130 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 2 2 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Bolboschoenus fluviatilis 7 N Bidens frondosa 5 N FACW Lycopus uniflorus Phalaris arundinacea 60 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Lythrum salicaria 30 Y OBL 0 1.61 107 172 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 5 N OBL 42 42 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 12 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Kingsley sandy loam 0 to 2% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Free water present at 14 inches below soil surface. Surface water present within the center of the basin. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes X NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 5-24 10YR 5/2 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Clay Loam 0-5 10YR 2/2 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Clay Loam Sampling Point:SP12-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Kingsley sandy loam 0 to 2% Lat:Long:Datum: Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 12 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status 55 55 0 0 0 1.59 110 175 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 5 N FACU Bolboschoenus fluviatilis 50 Y OBL (Plot size: 5 ft. Phalaris arundinacea 40 Y FACW Solidago gigantea 10 N Lythrum salicaria 5 N OBL Cirsium arvense Y 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 110 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FACW 50 100 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 2 2 5 20 100.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP12-2WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1C , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP12-2W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-10 10YR 2/1 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Loam 10-24 10YR 4/1 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M Clay Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of the soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) All species FAC or drier. PI > 3 Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 10 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP13-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 0 0 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 3 3 5 20 100.00% Y 0 Poa pratensis 95 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Glechoma hederacea 5 N FACU 5 3.04 115 350 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 0 0 110 330 Rhamnus cathartica 5 Y FAC Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Acer rubrum 10 Y FAC Species Indicator Status Y N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 1-6% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 14-24 10YR 4/4 100 Silt Loam 0-14 10YR 3/1 100 Silt Loam Sampling Point:SP13-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Duluth silt loam 0 to 2% Lat:Long:Datum: Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 13 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 100 200 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Phalaris arundinacea 100 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Y 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 100 200 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 1 1 0 0 100.00% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP13-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PEM1A , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP13-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-4 10YR 2/1 100 Loam 4-12 10YR 2/1 93 10YR 4/6 7 C M Silt Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) 12-24 10YR 2/1 90 10YR 4/6 10 C M Silt Loam US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 Dominance test is >50% 6 Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Hillslope Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: Y Duluth silt loam 1-6% Lat:Long:Datum: N N VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Absolute % Cover30 ft. Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. N Betula papyrifera 15 Y FACU Species Indicator Status 0 0 70 210 0 3.36 110 370 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 Poa pratensis 60 Y FAC (Plot size: 5 ft. Solidago canadensis 25 Y FACU Andropogon gerardii 10 N N 0 Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 95 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: FAC 0 0 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) N 3 1 40 160 33.33% Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 15 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP14-1UpMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Linear S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) None , or hydrology , or hydrology US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Sampling Point:SP14-1Up Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** 0-16 10YR 3/1 100 Silt Loam 16-24 10YR 3/1 97 10YR 4/4 3 C M Silt Loam Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) NHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1)Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) N No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Project/Site: Slope (%): Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year?(If no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation , soil significantly disturbed? Are vegetation , soil naturally problematic? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Hydrophytic vegetation present? Hydric soil present?Is the sampled area within a wetland? Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.) Dominance Test Worksheet ) 1 (A) 2 3 (B) 4 5 (A/B) Total Cover )Prevalence Index Worksheet 1 Total % Cover of: 2 OBL species x 1 = 3 FACW species x 2 = 4 FAC species x 3 = 5 FACU species x 4 = Total Cover UPL species x 5 = Herb stratum )Column totals (A)(B) 1 Prevalence Index = B/A = 2 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation 5 X Dominance test is >50% 6 X Prevalence index is ≤3.0* 7 8 9 10 Total Cover Woody vine stratum ) 1 2 Total Cover Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Number of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Species Across all Strata: that are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Midwest Region City/County: Maplewood/Ramsey Sampling Date: *Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic 11/1/2023 SP14-1WMN Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave S: 12, T:28N, R:22W (If needed, explain any answers in remarks.) PABGx , or hydrology , or hydrology Lower Afton Road Hydrophytic vegetation present? (Plot size: 30 ft. 100 (Plot size: 15 ft. Tree Stratum (Plot size: OBL 70 140 Morphological adaptations* (provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Y 2 2 0 0 100.00% Y 0 Lycopus uniflorus 5 N Phalaris arundinacea 70 Y FACW (Plot size: 5 ft. Scirpus pedicellatus 25 Y OBL 0 1.70 100 170 Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* (explain) 0 0 30 30 0 0 Absolute % Cover30 ft. Wetland 14 Climatic conditions are typical (normal) based on the gridded database. Y Species Indicator Status Y Y VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Are "normal circumstances" present? Yes Y Duluth silt loam 0 to 2% Lat:Long:Datum: Investigator(s):Mary Clare M. & Michael G. Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Applicant/Owner:D.R. Horton State: Depression Section, Township, Range: Soil Map Unit Name: US Amy Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR K, L, R) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) X Aquatic Fauna (B13) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) No free water or saturation observed within 24 inches of soil surface. Surface water present in the center of the basin. *Type: C = Concentration, D = Depletion, RM = Reduced Matrix, MS = Masked Sand Grains. **Location: PL = Pore Lining, M = Matrix Indicators of wetland hydrology present? Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R) Dark Surface (S7) (LRR K, L) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils: Other (explain in remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Iron Deposits (B5) Drift Deposits (B3) (includes capillary fringe) Surface water present? Yes NoSaturation present? Field Observations: Depth (inches): Thin Muck Surface (C7) Y Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Depth (inches): Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Depth (inches): Sediment Deposits (B2) SOIL Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation (A3) HYDROLOGY Surface Water (A1)Surface Soil Cracks (B6) High Water Table (A2) 2 cm Muck (A10) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Drainage Patterns (B10) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depleted Matrix (F3) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) Hydric Soil Indicators: Describe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: *Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic Type: Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) YHydric soil present? Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Water Marks (B1) 12-24 10YR 4/6 Sandy Clay Loam 0-12 10YR 5/2 70 10YR 4/6 30 C M Loam Sampling Point:SP14-1W Depth (Inches) Matrix Redox Features Texture RemarksColor (moist) % Color (moist) % Type* Loc** US Army Corps of Engineers Midwest Region Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX C Precipitation Data Attachment 6 Maplewood, Minnesota: Precipitation Summary Source: Minnesota Climatology Working Group Site Visit: November 1st and 2nd, 2023 Monthly Totals: 2023 Target: T 28N R 22W S 12, Lat: 44.928513 Lon: -92.987635 mon year cc tttN rrW ss nnnn oooooooo pre Jan 2023 62 29N 22W 35 SWCD 2.69 Feb 2023 62 29N 22W 35 SWCD 3.75 Mar 2023 62 29N 22W 35 SWCD 3.09 Apr 2023 82 28N 21W 18 SWCD 3.03 May 2023 82 28N 21W 18 SWCD 2.17 Jun 2023 82 28N 21W 18 SWCD 2.92 Jul 2023 82 28N 21W 18 SWCD 3.60 Aug 2023 82 28N 21W 18 SWCD 2.95 Sep 2023 82 28N 21W 18 SWCD 4.38 Oct 2023 82 28N 21W 16 SWCD 4.20 Nov 2023 m August/September/October/November Daily Records Date Precip. Aug 1, 2023 0 Aug 2, 2023 0 Aug 3, 2023 0 Aug 4, 2023 0 Aug 5, 2023 0 Aug 6, 2023 .20 Aug 7, 2023 0 Aug 8, 2023 0 Aug 9, 2023 0 Aug 10, 2023 0 Aug 11, 2023 .50 Aug 12, 2023 .70 Aug 13, 2023 - Aug 14, 2023 1.55 Aug 15, 2023 0 Aug 16, 2023 0 Aug 17, 2023 0 Aug 18, 2023 0 Aug 19, 2023 0 Aug 20, 2023 0 Aug 21, 2023 0 Aug 22, 2023 0 Aug 23, 2023 0 Aug 24, 2023 0 Aug 25, 2023 0 Aug 26, 2023 0 Aug 27, 2023 0 Aug 28, 2023 0 Aug 29, 2023 0 Aug 30, 2023 0 Aug 31, 2023 0 1991-2020 Summary Statistics Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec WARM ANN WAT 30% 0.58 0.60 1.39 2.52 3.31 4.01 2.93 3.36 2.10 1.75 1.04 0.84 19.59 31.67 31.37 70% 1.30 1.36 2.16 3.58 5.26 5.59 5.19 5.46 4.89 4.09 1.86 1.83 23.54 36.75 36.36 mean 0.98 1.00 1.85 3.10 4.33 5.03 4.25 4.47 3.37 2.98 1.73 1.43 21.46 34.53 34.46 Date Precip. Sep 1, 2023 0 Sep 2, 2023 0 Sep 3, 2023 0 Sep 4, 2023 0 Sep 5, 2023 0 Sep 6, 2023 0 Sep 7, 2023 0 Sep 8, 2023 0 Sep 9, 2023 .03 Sep 10, 2023 0 Sep 11, 2023 0 Sep 12, 2023 .25 Sep 13, 2023 0 Sep 14, 2023 0 Sep 15, 2023 .22 Sep 16, 2023 .01 Sep 17, 2023 0 Sep 18, 2023 0 Sep 19, 2023 0 Sep 20, 2023 0 Sep 21, 2023 0 Sep 22, 2023 0 Sep 23, 2023 0 Sep 24, 2023 1.40 Sep 25, 2023 .18 Sep 26, 2023 .48 Sep 27, 2023 .03 Sep 28, 2023 .02 Sep 29, 2023 1.76 Sep 30, 2023 0 Date Precip. Oct 1, 2023 m Oct 2, 2023 0 Oct 3, 2023 T Oct 4, 2023 .16 Oct 5, 2023 0 Oct 6, 2023 .09 Oct 7, 2023 .10 Oct 8, 2023 0 Oct 9, 2023 0 Oct 10, 2023 0 Oct 11, 2023 0 Oct 12, 2023 0 Oct 13, 2023 .95 Oct 14, 2023 .98 Oct 15, 2023 .02 Oct 16, 2023 0 Oct 17, 2023 0 Oct 18, 2023 .01 Oct 19, 2023 .04 Oct 20, 2023 0 Oct 21, 2023 0 Oct 22, 2023 0 Oct 23, 2023 .03 Oct 24, 2023 .05 Oct 25, 2023 1.04 Oct 26, 2023 .61 Oct 27, 2023 .12 Oct 28, 2023 0 Oct 29, 2023 0 Oct 30, 2023 0 Oct 31, 2023 0 Date Precip. Nov 1, 2023 0 Nov 2, 2023 0 Attachment 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1/30 2/14 3/1 3/16 3/31 4/15 4/30 5/15 5/30 6/14 6/29 7/14 7/29 8/13 8/28 9/12 9/27 10/12 10/27 Da i l y a n d m o n t h l y t o t a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n ( i n c h e s ) daily precip 30d rolling total 30 - day rolling total Climate Conditions 2023 Lower Afton Road Maplewood, MN normal precip range Site Visit: November 1st and 2nd, 2023 Attachment 6 Attachment 6 Lower Afton Road Wetland Delineation Report APPENDIX D Historic Aerial Review Attachment 6 Historic Aerial Review- 1940 Ramsey County Aerial Photo Lower Afton Road (2023 - 160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area Wetland Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USGS Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland. Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland.Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland. WTL 1 WTL 2 WTL 3 WTL 4 WTL 7 WTL 8 Attachment 6 Historic Aerial Review- 1953 Ramsey County Aerial Photo Lower Afton Road (2023 - 160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area Wetland Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USGS Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland. Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland.Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland. WTL 1 WTL 2 WTL 3 WTL 4 WTL 7 WTL 8 Attachment 6 Historic Aerial Review- 1985 Ramsey County Aerial Photo Lower Afton Road (2023 - 160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area Wetland Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USGS Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland. Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland.Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland. WTL 1 WTL 2 WTL 3 WTL 4 WTL 7 WTL 8 Attachment 6 Historic Aerial Review- 1991 Ramsey County Aerial Photo Lower Afton Road (2023 - 160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area Wetland Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USGS Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland. Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland.Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland. WTL 1 WTL 2 WTL 3 WTL 4 WTL 7 WTL 8 Attachment 6 Historic Aerial Review- 2003 Ramsey County Aerial Photo Lower Afton Road (2023 - 160)Maplewood, Minnesota Note: Boundaries indicatedon this figure are approximate and do not constitute an official survey product. ¯0 1,000 Feet Legend Review Area Wetland Source: MNGEO Spatial Commons, USGS Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland.Wetlands 1-4 excavated in upland. Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland.Wetlands 7 & 8 excavated in upland. WTL 1 WTL 2 WTL 3 WTL 4 WTL 7 WTL 8 Ponds excavated sometime between 1991 and 2003. Attachment 6 LOWE R A F T O N R O A D CE N T U R Y A V E S (PUB L I C ) CE N T U R Y A V E S POULIOT PKWY CENTURY CIR PARKWOOD DR (P U B L I C ) (P U B L I C ) (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) LINWOOD AVE E(PUBLIC) CE N T U R Y A V E S 1 6 1 3 1 6 1 3 BL U E S T E M S T R E E T BL U E S T E M S T R E E T ASTER AVE CL O V E R S T R E E T CLOV E R S T R E E T CONEFLOWER AVE INDIGO AVE SUN F L O W E R C T WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATERL E A F C T HO N E Y C I R BLU E S T E M S T R E E T 1 6 1 10 WETLAND BUFFER GRADING EXHIBIT MAPLEWOOD, MN LEGEND Attachment 7 LOWE R A F T O N R O A D CE N T U R Y A V E S (PUB L I C ) CE N T U R Y A V E S POULIOT PKWY CENTURY CIR PARKWOOD DR (P U B L I C ) (P U B L I C ) (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) LINWOOD AVE E(PUBLIC) CE N T U R Y A V E S 1 6 1 3 1 6 1 3 BL U E S T E M S T R E E T BL U E S T E M S T R E E T ASTER AVE CL O V E R S T R E E T CLOV E R S T R E E T CONEFLOWER AVE INDIGO AVE SUN F L O W E R C T WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATERL E A F C T HO N E Y C I R BLU E S T E M S T R E E T 1 6 1 10 WETLAND BUFFER GRADING EXHIBIT MAPLEWOOD, MN LEGEND Attachment 8 1 6 1 3 1 6 1 3 BL U E S T E M S T R E E T BL U E S T E M S T R E E T ASTER AVE CL O V E R S T R E E T CLOVE R S T R E E T CONEFLOWER AVE INDIGO AVE SUN F L O W E R C T WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATERL E A F C T HO N E Y C I R BLU E S T E M S T R E E T 1 6 1 10 WETLAND BUFFER CALCULATIONS MAPLEWOOD, MN WETLAND SUMMARY: WETLAND BUFFER CALCULATIONS: LEGEND: Attachment 9 1 6 1 3 1 6 1 3 > h  ^ d  D  ^ d Z   d > h  ^ d  D  ^ d Z   d ^dZs > K s  Z  ^ d Z   d >Ks Z  ^ d Z   d KE&>KtZs /E/'Ks ^hE & > K t  Z   d tdZ>&tz t d  Z >   &  t  z tdZ>   &   d ,K E  z   / Z >h  ^ d  D  ^ d Z   d 1 6 1 10 tdZ>   & d tdZ>   &d& ttd >>d WETLAND BUFFER & GREEN SPACE CALCULATIONS MAPLEWOOD, MN WETLAND SUMMARY: WETLAND BUFFER CALCULATIONS: LEGEND: Attachment 10 LOWE R A F T O N R O A D CE N T U R Y A V E S (PUB L I C ) CE N T U R Y A V E S POULIOT PKWY CENTURY CIR PARKWOOD DR (P U B L I C ) (P U B L I C ) (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) (PUBLIC) LINWOOD AVE E(PUBLIC) CE N T U R Y A V E S 1 6 1 3 1 6 1 3 BL U E S T E M S T R E E T BL U E S T E M S T R E E T ASTER AVE CL O V E R S T R E E T CLOV E R S T R E E T CONEFLOWER AVE INDIGO AVE SUN F L O W E R C T WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATERL E A F C T HO N E Y C I R BLU E S T E M S T R E E T 1 6 1 10 BL E TE M TR E E 1 TON ROAD (PUB L I C ) N ROA D N ROA D RE E T 6 1 3 1 6 TRAIL IMPACTS TO WETLAND BUFFERS MAPLEWOOD, MN LEGEND Attachment 11 S0 0 ° 2 5 ' 1 7 " E 1 3 2 0 . 8 1 S88°34'31"W 600.10 N0 0 ° 2 3 ' 2 9 " W 5 7 4 . 0 9 CE N T U R Y A V E S (P U B L I C ) 1 6 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 41 403938 22 5 1 2 3 4 7 9 11 12 5 6 8 10 7 8 6 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 45 44 43 42 49 48 47 46 2726252423 4 2 1 3 OUTLOT A OUTLOT C 1 3 1 6 1 3 OUTLOT F OU T L O T F BLOCK 9 LOT 24 BLOCK 8 LOT 50 BLOCK 8 LOT 51 WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATER L E A F C T HO N E Y C I R OUTLOT G OUTLOT F 50 9 10 11 14 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 10 19 20 21 INSET A INSET D INSET C INSET E INSET B FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N LEGEND: EX-1 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA T I O E X H I B I T - O V E R A L L Attachment 12 45 44 43 49 48 47 46 1 3 HO N E Y C I R OUTLOT 50 ENCROACHMENT AREA = 57 SF ENCROACHMENT AREA = 1,917 SF 28 29 22 2726252423 OUTLOT ENCROACHMENT AREA = 76 SF 22 19 20 21 223ATERL E A F C T ENCROACHMENT AREA = 27 SF ENCROACHMENT AREA = 76 SF 7 9 11 12 8 10 1 3 BLOCK 9 LOT 24 WA T E R L E A F W A Y 1 ENCROACHMENT AREA = 1,188 SF 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ENCROACHMENT AREA = 76 SF ENCROACHMENT AREA = 149 SF FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N LEGEND: EX-2 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T PA T I O E X H I B I T - I N S E T S INSET A INSET C INSET D INSET B INSET E TOTAL BUFFER ENCROACHMENT AREA = 3,490 SF = 0.08 AC Attachment 13 Attachment 14 Attachment 14 Attachment 14 Native Installation Overview Project Overview 1. Establishing a native landscape will provide a long-term, ecologically sound landscape that is adapted to the existing conditions of the site. It will add a distinctive look to the property and provide valuable habitat for songbirds, butterflies, bees, and other pollinators. Additionally, native plantings contribute significantly to carbon sequestration by storing carbon in their biomass and roots. They also aid in stormwater purification by filtering out pollutants and excess nutrients, thus improving water quality. Furthermore, native landscapes help restore soils by promoting biodiversity, preventing erosion, and enhancing soil structure and nutrient cycling, leading to healthier and more resilient ecosystems. 2. The upland areas will be seeded with native prairie grasses and wildflowers adapted to the well-drained, sunny conditions. The Riparian areas will be seeded with wetland grasses and flowers that are adapted to the saturated soil conditions. 3. Following initial grading (done by others) the site will be treated with herbicide to kill existing weeds, tilled, and harrowed to provide a smooth seedbed, seeded with native grasses and wildflowers, and mulched with straw and anchor disked/covered with straw erosion blanket to protect the seeding and enhance germination. Attachment 14 Project Areas Attachment 14 Project Dimensions & Planting Zones 1. The Native Seeding Project Area is approximately 25.59 Acres With 6.34 Acres of Maintained area and 19.25 Acres of New installation areas 2. Depending on condition and the number of native species present of maintained areas restoration techniques may vary in some cases a full restoration will be needed. Project Site Preparation Planting Preparation 1. Project area will be graded before the seeding work begins (done by general contractor). 2. Remove invasive woody species by flush cutting and stump treating with Triclopyr herbicide. 3. Allow regrowth to occur. Apply glyphosate and triclopyr herbicides per the manufacturer's directions to the growing vegetation. Allow a minimum of 30 days before disturbing the site with other procedures. 2-3 Site preparations for sprays may be needed to control unwanted plant species. 4. As per the manufacturer's directions, in areas near water, apply an aquatic-approved glyphosate herbicide in areas with growing vegetation. Allow a minimum of 10 days before disturbing the vegetation with other procedures. 5. Remove dead vegetation by implementing a controlled burn using appropriate procedures, equipment, and permits. (If needed in Maintained Areas) 6. Mow the dead vegetation and remove excess thatch as needed. (If needed in Maintained Areas) 7. Mow the existing vegetation with a sickle or flail-type mower to a height of 4" to 6". (If needed in Maintained Areas 8. Harley-rake, Harrow, or hand-rake, the soil to remove thatch and create a smooth seedbed. Attachment 14 Project Installation Seed & Seeding 1. Seeding can occur during the growing season up to freeze-up, and in some instances after freeze-up. 2. To stabilize the site, the project area will only be planted with native grasses and wildflowers. 3. All Native seed mixes seed will be seeded with a no-till seed drill designed for native seeding (Truax® or equivalent), or Vicon Broadcast seeder 4. A raking will follow to incorporate the seed into the soil. 5. In areas too steep or small for equipment, the seed will be hand broadcast and raked into the soil. 6. A harrowing or raking will follow all grass seeding. Project Seed Mixes On the next pages are the custom seed mixes proposed for your site. Each description includes the specific species, the percent of the mix, and overall seeding rate for your project site. Project seed mixes generated using PRI’s PRESTO application. Using the address and sight conditions PRESTO creates a list of ecologically appropriate native species historically seen in the area. Seed mixes specifically created for Rust Patch Bumble Bee habitat. Seed Mixes are subject to change based on availability but will incorporate appropriate native species if changed Attachment 14 Dry Prairie Mix Mesic Prairie Mix Dry Grass Mix Dry Wildflower Mix Andropogon gerardii Big Bluestem 20.00%Achillea millefolium Common Yarrow 3.00% Bouteloua curtipendula Sideoats Grama 16.00%Amorpha canescens Leadplant 4.00% Elymus canadensis Canada Wild Rye 5.00%Anemone virginiana Tall Thimbleweed 2.00% Elymus trachycaulus Slender Wheatgrass 6.00%Artemisia ludoviciana Prairie Sage 1.00% Juncus tenuis Path Rush 1.00%Asclepias syriaca Common Milkweed 3.00% Panicum virgatum Switchgrass 2.00%Asclepias verticillata Whorled Milkweed 1.00% Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass 10.00%Dalea candida White Prairie Clover 15.00% Schizachyrium scoparium Little Bluestem 40.00%Dalea purpurea Purple Prairie Clover 15.00% Drymocallis arguta Prairie Cinquefoil 1.00% Heliopsis helianthoides Common Ox-eye 5.00% Grasses seeded at 12 Lbs/Acre Monarda fistulosa Wild Bergamot 2.00% Wildflowers Seeded at 64 Oz/Acre Ratibida pinnata Yellow Coneflower 3.00% Rudbeckia hirta Black-eyed Susan 14.00% Solidago nemoralis Gray Goldenrod 2.00% Solidago rigida Stiff Goldenrod 5.00% Solidago speciosa Showy Goldenrod 4.00% Symphyotrichum ericoides Heath Aster 1.00% Symphyotrichum lanceolatum Panicled Aster 2.00% Symphyotrichum oolentangiense Sky Blue Aster 4.00% Zizia aptera Heartleaf Alexanders 5.00% Zizia aurea Golden Alexanders 8.00% Mesic Grass Mix Mesic Wildflower Mix Andropogon gerardii Big Bluestem 18.00%Achillea millefolium Common Yarrow 4.00% Bouteloua curtipendula Sideoats Grama 9.00%Agastache foeniculum Fragrant Giant Hyssop 5.00% Carex bebbii Bebb's Sedge 0.50%Amorpha canescens Leadplant 3.00% Carex brevior Plains Oval Sedge 3.00%Anemone cylindrica Thimbleweed 1.00% Carex vulpinoidea Fox Sedge 0.50%Asclepias syriaca Common Mi lkweed 4.00% Elymus canadensis Canada Wild Rye 8.00%Asclepias tuberosa Butterfly Milkweed 2.00% Elymus trachycaulus Slender Wheatgrass 5.50%Asclepias verticillata Whorled Milkweed 1.00% Koeleria macrantha June Grass 0.50%Coreopsis palmata Prairie Coreopsis 4.00% Panicum virgatum Switchgrass 1.00%Dalea candida White Prairie Clover 12.00% Sporobolus heterolepis Prairie Dropseed 3.00%Dalea purpurea Purple Prairie Clover 12.00% Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass 15.00%Doellingeria umbellata Flat-topped Aster 1.00% Schizachyrium scoparium Little Bluestem 36.00%Drymocallis arguta Prairie Cinquefoil 2.00% Lespedeza capitata Bush Clover 5.00% Liatris aspera Rough Blazing Star 1.00% Grasses seeded at 13 Lbs/Acre Monarda fistulosa Wild Bergamot 2.00% Wildflowers seeded at 64 Oz/Acre Ratibida pinnata Yellow Coneflower 2.00% Rudbeckia hirta Black-eyed Susan 13.00% Symphyotrichum lanceolatum Panicled Aster 1.00% Solidago rigida Stiff Goldenrod 4.00% Solidago speciosa Showy Goldenrod 4.00% Symphyotrichum laeve Smooth Blue Aster 4.00% Symphyotrichum novae-angliae New England Aster 2.00% Verbena hastata Blue Vervain 4.00% Zizia aurea Golden Alexanders 7.00% Attachment 14 Riparian Seed Mix Erosion Control 1. The cover crop will be sown along with the native grasses. 2. All areas not blanketed will be mulched with clean straw at the rate of 1.5 tons per acre. 3. The straw will be disk anchored immediately after mulching. 4. Erosion blanket (S150 S75 SC150 SC150bn C125 C125bn Anti-wash geo-jute or equivalent) will be applied per the manufacturer's directions to designated areas. (Type of Blanket will depend on site conditions. Riparian Grass Mix Riparian Wildflower Mix Andropogon gerardii Big Bluestem 26.00%Agastache foeniculum Fragrant Giant Hyssop 4.00% Bromus ciliatus Fringed Brome 6.00%Anemone canadensis Canada Anemone 4.00% Calamagrostis canadensis Bluejoint Grass 1.00%Asclepias incarnata Swamp Milkweed 4.00% Carex stricta Tussock Sedge 2.00%Asclepi as syriaca Common Milkweed 3.00% Carex vulpinoidea Fox Sedge 1.00%Dalea candida White Prairie Clover 10.00% Elymus canadensis Canada Wild Rye 8.00%Dalea purpurea Purple Prairie Clover 8.00% Elymus virginicus Virginia Wild Rye 10.00%Doellingeria umbellata Flat-topped Aster 2.00% Glyceria grandis American Manna 1.00%Eutrochium maculatum Joe Pye Weed 4.00% Glyceria striata Fowl Manna Grass 1.00%Eupatori um perfoliatum Boneset 3.00% Juncus torreyi Torrey's Rush 0.50%Heliopsis helianthoides Common Ox-eye 4.00% Scirpus cyperinus Woolgrass 0.50%Iris versicolor Blue Flag Iris 3.50% Sorghastrum nutans Indiangrass 15.00%Liatri s ligulistylis Meadow Blazing Star 2.00% Spartina pectinata Prairie Cord Grass 4.00%Liatri s pycnostachya Tall Blazing Star 3.00% Schizachyrium scoparium Little Bluestem 24.00%Mimulus ringens Monkey Flower 0.50% Monarda fistulosa Wild Bergamot 2.00% Physostegia virginiana Obedient Plant 3.00% Grasses Seeded at 8lb/Acre Symphyotrichum lateriflorum Calico Aster 1.00% Wildflowers Seeded at 48 Oz/Acre Solidago rigida Stiff Goldenrod 6.00% Symphyotrichum novae-angliae New England Aster 3.00% Symphyotrichum puniceum Red-Stalked Aster 1.00% Vernonia fasciculata Ironweed 3.00% Verbena hastata Blue Vervain 4.00% Veronicastrum virginicum Culver's Root 2.00% Zizia aurea Golden Alexanders 4.00% Pycnanthemum virginianum Mountain Mint 2.00% Rudbeckia hirta Black-eyed Susan 12.00% Symphyotrichum laeve Smooth Blue Aster 2.00% Attachment 14 Attachment 14 Attachment 14 1 6 1 3 1 6 1 3 BL U E S T E M S T R E E T BL U E S T E M S T R E E T ASTER AVE CL O V E R S T R E E T CLOVE R S T R E E T CONEFLOWER AVE INDIGO AVE SUN F L O W E R C T WATERLEAF WAY WA T E R L E A F W A Y WATERL E A F C T HO N E Y C I R BLU E S T E M S T R E E T 1 6 1 10 BL U E S T E M ST R E E T BL U E S T E M S T R E E T WATERWATEWWAATAT NFL O W E R CT BLU E S T E M S T R E E T SUN F ASTER AVE NATIVE SEEDING PLAN MAPLEWOOD, MN LEGEND: WETLAND BUFFER CALCULATIONS: Attachment 15 1 6 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2118171615141312111098765 4 3 2 1 19 18 17 20 2829303132 33343536 37 41 40 39 38 22 5 123479111256810 78 6 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BLOC K 1 BLOCK 1 BLOC K 2 BLOC K 2 2 1 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 10 912 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14 23 22 21 24 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 109 12 13 87654321 1423 22 21 24 25 26 19 18 17 16 15 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 14 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 BLOC K 3 BLOC K 3 BLOCK 4 BLOCK 4 BLO C K 4 BLOCK 5 BL O C K 5 BL O C K 6 BL O C K 7 45 444342 49 484746 27 26 25 24 23 4 2 13 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T A OU T L O T C OU T L O T E OU T L O T D OU T L O T A 1 3 1 6 1 3 OU T L O T F OUTLOT F BL O C K 9 LO T 2 4 BL O C K 8 LO T 5 0 BL O C K 8 LO T 5 1 PA R K OU T L O T B OU T L O T G OU T L O T F 50 1 6 91011 14 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 10 OU T VIEW A VIEW B VIEW C VIEW D BLBLBOOOBLO C BLO C LOOCKCKOCKOCOCOC 444K 44 CK 4K 4 CK BLOCBLOCBBBLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLOLLLLLLOLLLLLLLLOLLLLLLLOOOOOOLOLLOLLLOLLLLLLLOOOOOLOOLOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOLOOOLLOOLOLLLLLOLOLOOOOOOOOLOOOOOOLLOOOOOLLLOLO 44444444444444444444444444444444 444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444 333333333333333333333333333KCKCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKCKCKCCCCKCCCKCKKKCKCKCKCKCKKKKKKKK KKKKKK BBBBBBBBB FF TTT FFF UTUOUUUUUUUUUU UTL BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB T 0000000000000000000000000000055555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000055555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555 TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT 9999999 KK 99 K 9999999999 KKKKKKKK 9999 KK 99999 2424 OOCCOCCCCLLLLLLLOOLLLLLOOOOOCOCOCCCOOOOLLOOLLLL BLBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB CCCCC1KKK OCOCOOCCK 2K 2 OCCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCCKCKCCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCCCCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCCCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCCKCKCKCCKCKCKCCKCKCKCKCKCCKCKCKCCKCKCKCCCKCKCKCCKCKCK OCOCOCK 2 OC OCKCKCKOOCCKK 3 CKKKKKKK 3K 3K 3K 3KKOOOOOOLOCOCOOCOCCCCCCKCKCKCKCKKKCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKCKKKKKKKKK 3KKK 3K 3KKKKK 3K 3K 3K 3K 3K 3KK 3K 3KK K KKKOCOOOOCOCOCOCOOOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOOOOOOOCOCOCOCOLOOLOOOOCOOOLOOLOOOCOKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOOOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOCOCOCOOOCOCCCCC LOLOLOLBLBLLOLOLOOLOLOBLOBLOLOLOLOBLLOLOLOBLBLBLBBLBLOLOBLOBLLLOBLBLBLBLBLOBLBLBLLOLOLOLOBLBLBLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOOOOOLOLOLOLOLOOOOOOOOOBBBBLBBBBBLBLBLBLBLBL K KKK5555555 BLLL 55555CK CKCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK OOOO BBLLLLOLLLBLLBLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLBBLLOOLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 66666666666666666 BBBBB 7777 BBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 61 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T LA N D S C A P E P L A N - O V E R A L L FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N PLANTING NOTES: LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: SEEDING NOTES: LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE: 1 TREE PLANTING NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1. TREE STAKING IS OPTIONAL. 2. DO NOT PRUNE THE TREE AT PLANTING. PRUNE ONLY CROSSOVER LIMBS, CO-DOMINANT LEADERS AND BROKEN OR DEAD BRANCHES. 3. FOR TREES IN CONTAINERS, REMOVE CONTAINER PRIOR TO PLANTING. FOR BARE ROOT TREES, PLACE TREE IN MIDDLE OF PLANTING HOLE, SPREAD ROOTS OUT RADIALLY FROM THE TRUNK AROUND THE PREPARED HOLE. 4. COMPLETELY REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF ALL TWINE, ROPE AND BASKETS. DISPOSE INTO PROPER LOCATION OR USE BIODEGRADABLE MATERIAL. PREPARE PLANTING AREA 3X THE DIAMETER OF THE ROOTBALL OR PER PLAN IF PLANTED IN A BIORETENTION OR LARGER PLANTING AREA PLACE ROOTBALL ON UNEXCAVATED OR TAMPED SOIL EXPOSE TRUNK FLARE, DO NOT PILE MULCH AGAINST TREE TRUNK MULCH RING, DIAMETER PER PLAN OR LANDSCAPE NOTES. PLACE MULCH SO NOT IN CONTACT WITH BASE OF TREE. TAMP SOIL AROUND ROOTBALL BASE FIRMLY WITH FOOT PRESSURE SO THAT THE ROOT BALL DOES NOT SHIFT. PLANTING SOIL, BACKFILL PLACED IN 6" LIFTS SOD UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL ROOTBALL PRUNE DEAD AND BROKEN BRANCHES 18" MIN. LEGEND: Attachment 16 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 BLO C K 1 BL O C K 1 19 18 17 16 15 20 11 10 9 12 13 14 23 22 21 24 19 18 20 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 23 22 21 24 25 26 BL O C K 4 BLOC K 4 BL O C K 5 OUTLOT A OUTLOT E OUTLOT D OUTLOT A BL U E S T E M S T R E E T CLOV E R S T R E E T RRTRRT S BLBLBBOOOBLOCOCLOLOCOOCKCKOCOCOOC444K 44K 444CKKK BL O C OC BBL O C BBBBB COLOOLOLOLOLOLOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOLOLOOOLOOOOLOOOOOOOOOOO 44444444444444444 3 - BH- HBHH3 - BH- BBB 3 - AP- AA 3 - AP333 -3 -33 - 2 - RBRB2 222 - RBR2222 -22 3 - AP- A3P-PAAP3 - AP-33 -3 A-P 2 - HLLLLL2 - HLLL - NF7 F- NF7 --7 7 F 6 - BM6 M6 - BM6M 5 - HL5L5 - HL55 5 - AE 6 - BMMMMB6 - BMMMMB 7 - NF 8 - SL LSL8L8 - SL8LS8SL 1 - RBRBB R1 - RBR-1 - 1 - RBR1 - 1 - RB-11111 -111 1 - RB1RBRBRBRRBRRB1 - RB1RRRR-RR 1 - RBBRBBB1 - RBR1B 1 - RBRBR1RBRB1 - RBR-R1 -1 R LLLOLOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOLOLOLLLO 1 - RBR RBRB1 - RBR11111B1 -R 3 - APAP- APAPAP3 - APAP3 -PAA 3 - APPAAAP3AP3A3 - APAAA3 -3 A3 3 - BHH BB3BH3B3 - BHB3 -3 B3 3 - NSNSNS3 S3NS33 - NS3 -N-N344444 2 - BH2 2 H2 - BH22 3 - NS33 NSSSSNNSNSS3 - NS333NNSN 3 - APP- AAAPPAP3A AP3 - AP3 - AAAA33 -A 3 - BHBBHHBH3BHBBH3 - BHBBB3BB CK 4CKCK44KKKLOOOO 3 - BHHBBBH3 HHHHBBHHHBH3 - BHHB3BHBB OOOOOO - RO1 11 - RO1111 -11 2 - NSNN2 - 2 2 2 - NSNN22 -22 4 - NS- NS 4 - NS444 --44 - 6 - RO66 - RO666 1 - SW S1 - SW111-11 1 - SWWSSSWSWSSW1 - SWW--- SS-S 1 - SWSWSWSW SWWSW1 - SWSSSW11-11 WS - SWS1W SWW1 - SWS111W-W1 -SW 1 - SWSW SW WWWW1 - SWSW1 -WSWSW BLBBBBBBBBB CCCCCCCCC 1 - SWSSWSW SW1 - SW1SS1 -W1S 3 - BM3- 3 - BM3-3 OO3 - AEA3 - AEAOOBLOBLBBBB 3 - RBRR3 - RBRR 2 - AEA2 - AE2A2 3 - RBR3 - RB-R SWSS3 - SS3 WWWW3 - SWSS3 - 3 - S- S33WWW 3 - BM M3 - BM33BM 3 - AE3 3 - RB33 - RB3 3 - CH3 CH3 - CH3 3 - NFF3-3 - NF3- 55555 CK 5 CKCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK 1 KKKKKKKKKKKKK 5 K 5 5 KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK NATIVE PLUGSTNATATATTTVEVEVE PPLUE PLVE PVE P DE-SLOPE,E-SE-SSLOOPPEPELOPPESLOSLOON SIDE-SNON SIDEE SSS SEE SCHEDULEEEE SC EDULDUDULLLELELELESEE ESE GSGGGNATIVE PLUGSLGGUUGGNNE DE-SLOPE,S OLLOOON SIDE-SSOOOO SEE SCHEDULEDUDDUUCSSSEE SS 62 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T LA N D S C A P E P L A N - E N L A R G E M E N T A FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N LEGEND: Attachment 17 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 18 17 16 15 14 13 19 18 17 20 BL BLO C K 2 BLO C K 2 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 17 16 151110 9 12 13 8 14 19 18 17 16 15 11 10 9 12 13 8765432 1 14 11 10 9 1213 8 7 654321 BLO C K 3 BL O C K 4 BLOCK 5 BLOCK 6 BLOCK 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT D BL U E S T E M S T R E E T ASTER AVE CL O V E R S T R E E T CONEFLOWER AVE INDIGO AVE WER C T BLU E S T E M S T R E E T STRTR CCC VVAVAAAAAAVVAVVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVAAAAAAAAA 444444444444444444444444444444444444444 KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK 44444444444444444444444444444 333333 CKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCCCCCCCCKCKCKKKKKKKK BBBBBBB 3 - NSN3N3 - NSNS3 3 3 - AP3AAPPA3 APAP3 - AP3-A3A3A3A 2 - AP- A- AP2 - AP-22 - A 7 - CHCCH7 - CH7C7 C 7 - ROO7 - RO 6 - SLLL6 - SL6 7 - HL7 - HL- ASTS 7 - PO 3 - ROO3 - ROO3 7 - CHH- CC7 - CH-7 C 4 - POPPO4 - PO4 5 - AEE5 - AE 1 - PO 3 - CH3 6 - PO6 - PO3 - SL3 - SL OCO4 - NFNOO4 - NFNCOO 6 - HL6 6 - HL66- 3 - ROO3 - ROO 2 - AE2 2 - AE2 5 - BMMB5 - BM 2 - CHCH 2 - CH 3 - NFN3 1 - RB-1 -1 - RB11-1 1 - 1 - RBRB1 - RBRB 1 - RBBR1 - RB11BR 4 - SL4 - SL 1 - RB- RRB1 - RB-RRB 2 - BH- HB2 - BH2-2 HB 2 - NSN2 - NSN 3 - APAAP3 - APAP 3 - AP APP3 - AP-AP 3 - BHBB3 - B- 3 BHBH3 - BHBB3 - B-3 --H 2 - BH2HB2 - BH2 HB 1 - ROO1 - RO1O 1 - RO- ROO1 - ROROO 5 - AE555 - AE555 3 - AE 3 - AE3 OOCCCCOCC LLLLLOOLLOOOOOCOOCCCOOLLLL 1 - SWWWSW1W- SW1 - SWW1- SSW1 -W1S- SW 1 - SWW1 1 - SWW1111 1 - SWWS1 - SWWS 1 - SS1SWSWWWWW1 - SS1SWSWWWW 1 - SWWSW1 - SWWSW OCOOCK 22 OCOCOCCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCCKCKCCKCKCKCKCK OCK 2 COCOOC 3 - SWSW3 - SW3 S 3 - RBB3 - RBB CKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCK 3 - AEAAE3 - AEAEA 1 - SW1 3 - RB 3 - POPO3 - PO3 P 3 - AEAE3 - AE3 A 3 - NF 3 - BMM3 - BM 3 - NSN- -3 - 3 - NS33-3 - 1 - AE1 - AE- 3 - RBRB3 - RB- R 3 - RBRB3 - RB 1 - NF- NNF1 - NF- NN 3 - CHH3 - CH3 C 3 - BM 33 - AE3 - AEAEAE AAE333 - A3 - AAEA3- AE 2 - CH22 2 - CH222 3 - CHCHCH3 - CH3 - CHC3 -C3 - C3 3 - NSSN3 - NSSN 3 - POO3 - POPO 3 - NFF3 - NF - CH3 - C- CCCCH3 CC3 - 33 C3 C3 5 3 - NFF3-3 - NF3- 3 - POP3 - POP LOOLOBLOLBBLLLOLLOLOLOLOBLOBLOLOLOLOLBLBLBLBLBLOBLLLBLBLBLBLOLOBLBLBLLOLOLOLOOOOLOLOLOLOBBBBBLBBBBBBBLBB K KKK5555555BLLL OOOBBLLLLLLOLLLLLLLBLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLBLBLOLOLOLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 66666666 BB 77777BBBB LOOCKCKOCOCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCKCK OCOOOCKCOC 5555555555555 6LOCK 6LLOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOO666 77BLOCK 7B7B 63 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T LA N D S C A P E P L A N - E N L A R G E M E N T B FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N LEGEND: Attachment 18 11 10 9 12 13 8 7 17 37 403938 BLO C K 2 21 654321 BLO C K 3 BLO C K 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 OUTLOT A OUTLOT A OUTLOT A BLOCK 8 LOT 51 PARK ASTER AVE SU N F L O W E R C T TEM S T R E E T OUTLOT B 1 6 SODOSODO SOD SODODSODO STR NNN CCC AVVVAAAAAAVVAAVVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVVVVVAAAAAAAAA 333333 CKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCCCCCCCKCKKCKCKKKKKKKKK 2 - AP- A- AP2 - AP-22 - A 6 - SLLL6 - SL6 7 - BMMMMBM7 - BM7B7B7B 7 - HL7 - HL- ASTS 7 - PO 7 - CHH- CC7 - CH-7 C 3 - RB- RBBRBRBB33 - RB- R3-33 R33333 1 - RBBR1 - RB1BR 2 - BHHB2 - BH2HB EXISTINGNNG CANOPYCNO EXISTING CANOPYPY EX I S T I N G C A N O P Y EE T C EXISTINGXI CANOPYCCY 3 - SWW3 - SWW3 1 - SWSSWS1 - SWSS 1 - SSSWSWWWWW1 - SS1SWSWWWW 2 - AEAAEE2 222 AE2 AE2AE2 - AE22EAA22EE2E OCK 2 COOC 3 - AEAAE3 - AEAEA 3 - BMM3 3 - BMBM33- B 1 - CH 1 - CH1 1 - AE1 - AE- 3 - RB-RB3 - RB- R 3 - SWW3 - SW3 - SWW O3 - POOO3 - PO 3 - NF 2 - CHCCC2 - CHCC KKCKKCKCCCCK 3KK 3 OCKOKKKKKKK 3KK 3KKKOOOOOOOOCOCOCOCOCOCOCCKCKCKCKCKKKKKKKCCCCCCKKCKKKKKKK 3K 3K 3K 3K 3K 3K 3K 3KKK 3K 3K 3K 3KKKKKKKOCCOCOOCOCOCOCOOCOCOOOOOOKKKKKKKKKKOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOOOOCCCCCC LOOLOBLOLBLBLLOLLOLOLOLOBLOBLOLOLOLOLBLBLBLBLBLOBLLLBLBLBLBLOBLBLLOLOLOLOLOLOOOOOLOLOLOLOBBBBLBBBBBBBLBB OCKOOCOC CCCCCCCCC 64 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T LA N D S C A P E P L A N - E N L A R G E M E N T C FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N LEGEND: Attachment 19 1 6 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 41 403938 22 5 1 2 3 4 7 9 11 12 5 6 8 10 7 8 6 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 45 44 43 42 49 48 47 46 2726252423 4 2 1 3 OUTLOT A OUTLOT C 1 3 1 6 1 3 OUTLOT F OU T L O T F BLOCK 9 LOT 24 BLOCK 8 LOT 50 BLOCK 8 LOT 51 OUTLOT G OUTLOT F 50 9 10 11 14 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 10 OUTUOOUTOUTOOOOUTU * * **** * * * * * * **** * * * * SODOSODSO SODODDSODODOD SOD SODSSODO SODDODSODSOS SODSOODSODSOOOD SODSSSODSODSOSODOSODSODSSSODSODSO SODOOSODOO SODSSODS SODDODSODOSO SODDDSOD SODODSODO SODODDSODOSOD SOD SODOSODO SOD SODODSODSO SODODODDDDSOSODSODDDSOD SOD SODOODSODOOOSODO FTFFFUUOUUUUUUU UT L BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 1 2 - NS NS2 NSNS2 - NS-2 N 3 - BMM3 - BMM3 6 - AEEE6AEAA6 - AEE66EAEAE 7 - ROROOO7 - RO7 -7 - ROO 3 - CH 6 - CHH 6 - CHH6 1 - RBRB- RB1 - RBB1 - 1 - RB-B1 - RB1-B 1 - RBBR1 - RB 1 - RBRB1 - RB1R 3 - NSNS 3 - NS 3 - BF 3 - BH 3 - BF3 - BF 3 - NS 3 - BF3 - BF3 3 - BH 3 - BH- 3 - BFFF3 - BF 3 - NS 3 - BFB3 - BFB 3 - BHBH33 - BHH3 3 - BF33 - BF3 - 3 - NS-3 - NS- 5 - BF 0000000000005555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555500000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000555555555555555555555555555555555555555555TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT 3 - APAAP3 - APAA 1 - RB1- R - RB1 - RB111 -1 - R 99999999KKK9999KKKK99K99 1 - RB 1 - RB11 2 - BF 5 - APP5A5APAP5 - APP5 -55 -5 A 5 - BFB5BF5 - BFB5F3 - BH3 - BH3 5 - BF5 5 FBB5 - BF5555FBB 3 - BFB3 - BFBF 99999993 - NS33 - NS3 3 - BF3 6 - POPO6 - PO 5 - SL- 5 - SL- 2 - POPO2 - PO2P2 1 - SL-1 - SL1- 6 - HLL6 - HL 2 - BH 2 - BFBBF2 - BFB2 - B2 2 - APA22 - APP2 1 - NFFFNF1 - NF11 - 1 - HL1 HH1 - HL1HH 2424 2 - RB2 2 - AP2P2 - AP 3 - APPPAAPAPAP3 - APPA3 - AAPAA PY EX I S T I N G C A N O P Y E Y EX I S T I N G C A N O P Y XE G C Y NG 1 666 1 - SWW1 - SW1W11 1 - SWSSWSSSSS1 - SWSW111 -SS1 1 - SW1 WSS1 - SW1S- 1 - SWS1 - SWS 1 - SWW- - - SW- SW- SW1 - SW1W--- S- SSW111111111-1111111111111111 1 - SW 1 - SW 1 - SWSW- SWW1 - SWSW11 -W1 2 - NS2 SSS2SSSSSSS2 - NS2SSS2S 5 - NFF5 - NF5F 65 CE N T U R Y P O N D S PR E L I M I N A R Y P L A T LA N D S C A P E P L A N - E N L A R G E M E N T D FOR REV I E W O N L Y PRELIMIN A R Y NOT FOR C O N S T R U C T I O N LEGEND: Attachment 20