## LIME TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting May 28, 2026 - 5:00 p.m. ## Mankato Regional Airport ## 3030 North Airport Road, Mankato MN **************************************** Any person speaking to the Commission shall give to the Secretary of the Commission the NAME and HOME ADDRESS of such person prior to speaking. **************************************** ## 1.CALL TO ORDER ## 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA ## 3.APPROVAL OF MINUTES ## 1.April 23rd, 2026 Draft Planning Commission Minutes ## 4.BUSINESS ITEMS 1. ## CYL-0004-26 Request of Kent Hays, on behalf of the property owners, Mark and Rachel Burgess, for a final plat for an adjustment of property lines that will create a new parcel combining a total of four lots. The subject property is described as Lot 4 Block 2, Hilgers subdivision AND Outlot D and Outlot E, Eagle Bluff, AND All of Parcel D-2 and Part of Parcel D-1, Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 28, 59618 230th Street, Mankato MN 56001, Lime Township, Blue Earth County (PID R400436177011, R400436177004, R400436177012, and R400436177007). The anticipated date of Lime Township Board action is June 9, 2026, at 7:30 p.m. at the Mankato Regional Airport. 2. ## CYL-0005-26 Request of Jim Hilgers, the property owner, for a final plat to create a new parcel, Lot 1 Block 1 of Eagle Bluff No.2. The subject property is described as Outlot A, Eagle Bluff, Lime Township, Blue Earth County (PID R400436178007). And that part of Parcels H and H-1, according to Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 18: Beginning at the Southeasterly corner of said parcel H-1; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 33 seconds West, (Minnesota County Coordinate Systems- Blue Earth County Zone- NAD83- 1986), along the easterly line of said Parcels H-1 and H, a distance of 241.28 feet to the northwesterly corner of Outlot A, Eagle Bluff, according to the plat thereof on file and of record with the Blue Earth County Recorder; thence North 56 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 62.73 feet; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 33 seconds East, a distance of 276.38 feet to a point on the southerly line of said Parcel H-1; thence North 89 degrees 58 minutes 15 seconds East, along said southerly line, a distance of 52.00 feet to the point of the beginning. The anticipated date of Lime Township Board action is June 9, 2026, at 7:30 p.m. at the Mankato Regional Airport. ## 5.MISCELLANEOUS ## 6.ADJOURNMENT ## Lime Township Planning Commission 4. 1. ## Meeting Date:05/28/2026 ## Title ## CYL-0004-26 Request of Kent Hays, on behalf of the property owners, Mark and Rachel Burgess, for a final plat for an adjustment of property lines that will create a new parcel combining a total of four lots. The subject property is described as Lot 4 Block 2, Hilgers subdivision AND Outlot D and Outlot E, Eagle Bluff, AND All of Parcel D-2 and Part of Parcel D-1, Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 28, 59618 230th Street, Mankato MN 56001, Lime Township, Blue Earth County (PID R400436177011, R400436177004, R400436177012, and ## R400436177007). The anticipated date of Lime Township Board action is June 9, 2026, at 7:30 p.m. at the Mankato Regional Airport. ## Applicant The applicant, Kent Hays, on behalf of the property owners, Mark and Rachel Burgess. ## Request Kent Hays, on behalf of Mark and Rachel Burgess, has requested the review of a final plat for an adjustment of property lines that will create a new parcel by combining four lots. The proposal reconfigures parcels owned by the property owner into one new lot of 4.5 acres. ## Location The subject property is described as Lot 4 Block 2, Hilgers subdivision AND Outlot D and Outlot E, Eagle Bluff, AND All of Parcel D-2 and Part of Parcel D-1, Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 28, 59618 ## 230th Street, Mankato MN 56001, Lime Township, Blue Earth County (PID R400436177011, R400436177004, R400436177012, and R400436177007). ## Existing Land Use The land consists of 4 parcels located north of Eagle Lake and is used for residential purposes. ## Zoning The property is located in Lime Township and is zoned Agriculture. ## Environmentally Sensitive Areas The parcels are located in the Shoreland District and in an area defined as an archaeological site. Additionally, there is a ravine located on the southern portion of the parcel ending in "7012", which abuts Eagle Lake. ## City Code ## The Lime Township Ordinance can be found at this link: Lime Township Ordinances ## The Lime Township Ordinance can be found at this link: Lime Township Ordinances ## Review Kent Hays, on behalf of the property owners, Mark and Rachel Burgess, are requesting a final plat review to allow for an adjustment of property lines that will create a new parcel by combining four lots into one new 4.5-acre lot. The four parcels that will be combined are described as "Outlot E, Lot 1 Block 2 of Hilgers’ Subdivision, Outlot D, and Parcel D-1". The proposal will combine the four parcels and will reconfigure them into Lot 1, Block 1 of Raemar Addition. There is currently a single-family dwelling located on the lot that the owner of the land currently resides in. As stated in the Lime Township Zoning Ordinance, “The following uses shall be permitted within the A Agriculture District: Single family, non-farm dwellings” (Article 4 Zoning Map and Districts, Section 2 Agriculture, Part B Permitted Use, Subpart 4). Therefore, the use of all four parcels being combined will conform to the standards of the Agriculture zoning district. The proposed Lot 1, Block 1, will meet the Agriculture District lot requirements by combining the parcels into a “lot [that] is not less than one (1) acre” (Article 4 Zoning Map and Districts, Section 2 Agriculture, Part F Lot Requirements, Subpart 1). The replatted land will consist of 4.5 acres, which exceeds the required one (1) acre requirement. The proposed lot combination conforms to the required width and lengths described in the Lime Township Zoning Ordinance. “Every lot or plot of land on which a dwelling in erected shall have a minimum width of not less than one hundred fifty (150) feet at the building setback line and a minimum depth of not less than one hundred seventy-five (175) feet” (Article 4 Zoning Map and Districts, Section 2 Agriculture, Part F Lot Requirements, Subpart 3). The submitted site plans reflect a width of 328.99 feet and a depth of over 571 feet, thus illustrating conformance with both the required lot width and lot depth requirements per the standards of the Agriculture zoning district. A single-family dwelling and a detached accessory structure currently reside on the parcel ending in "7004" and conform to the lot coverage requirements listed in the Lime Township Zoning Ordinance that states, “no more than twenty-five (25) percent of the lot area shall be covered by principal and accessory structures” (Article 4 Zoning Map and Districts, Section 2 Agriculture, Part F Lot Requirements, Subpart 4). The home and accessory structure’s square footage is 3,418, which would be a 1.75% lot coverage with the proposed lot combination. Therefore, the request would conform to the maximum lot coverage standards, as it occupies less than 25% of the total lot area. Blue Earth County has provided commentary on the septic system located on parcel R400436177004, which will require coordination with the agency for a compliance inspection. A condition within the Preliminary plat required the applicant to apply for a compliance inspection with Blue Earth County prior to submission of the final plat application. This condition was met and completed. The applicant coordinated with Blue Earth County, and the County has provided commentary that the “septic system serving the existing house is compliant” and that the “final plat does not seem to negatively impact the current or future septic situation on the property”. Additionally, the County reviewed the well on site and stated the “proposed final plat does not appear to negatively impact the known well situation on this property.” The applicant has fulfilled the condition and is in compliance with Blue Earth County. Given that there are no known wetlands located across the four parcels, “nor were there any indications of wetlands prior to the road realignment”, a wetland delineation was not ordered (Nick McCabe, Senior Environmental Scientist). However, the owner of the land shall continue to align with the Lime Township Zoning ordinance, Blue Earth County standards, and the Department of Natural Resources standards to protect, preserve, and conserve environmentally sensitive areas and natural resources of the Township. Access to the site will remain the same off of 230th Street, which aligns with the Lime Township ordinance within the Agriculture district, which states “every lot or plot of land on which a dwelling is erected shall have an approved access to a public right-of-way” (Article 4 Zoning Map and Districts, Section 2 Agriculture, Part F Lot Requirements, Subpart 5). As seen in the provided site plans, the applicant accesses his home of off 230th Street along the easternmost side of Miranda Trail Road. Any changes to this area are prohibited without further review and approval by the Town Board and Blue Earth County. A completed Preliminary and Final Title opinion letter, written by the developer’s attorney, was submitted by the applicant. A drainage report describing the current flows, expected flows, and measures to be taken to ensure flows will not cause erosion and sedimentation have been submitted in the final plat application. The report describes how water flows within the property and the applicant will continue to provide erosion control measures to prevent erosion and sedimentation. ## Findings Staff respectfully submits the following findings: The proposed use will ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, all lands will be developed with adequate protection provided for the health and safety of residents by requiring necessary services such as properly designed streets and adequate sewage and water service. The applicant will be coordinating plans with Blue Earth County for a compliance inspection of the sewer up to conformance. 1. The applicant will continually work with Blue Earth County and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to ensure that effective protection is given to the natural resources of the community, especially groundwater and surface waters within the property. 2. The proposed final plat encourages a well-planned division of land through the establishment of adequate design standards, given that the request aligns well with the lot requirements within the Agriculture district. 3. The Final Plat will not cause inferior developments that might adversely affect the local tax base, given that the use will remain the same as previous residential use. 4. The proposal does not place the cost of improvement against those benefiting from their construction, since the request is to combine four parcels into a singular lot. 5. The Final Plat’s outcome will contribute to the established neighborhood, which will be of lasting credit to the community. 6. The proposed use will not affect the township or county in facilitating adequate provisions for transportation and other public facilities. 7. The proposal does secure the rights of the public with respect to public lands and waters.8. The approval of the final plat will improve land records by the establishment of standards for land divisions, surveys, and plats. 9. The safeguard the interests of the public, the homeowner, the subdivider, and local units of government will remain intact since the use will remain the same as the current use; the only difference is the way the land is divided. All parcels will be combined into one lot and utilized for residential use. 10. The applicant will prevent, where possible, excessive governmental operating and maintenance costs.11. ## Recommendation Based on conformance with the conditions of the preliminary plat, staff recommends approval of the final plat. ## Attachments ## General Location Map ## Aerial Map ## Final Plat ## Blue Earth County Review ## Wetland Email ## Drainage This inf or ma ti o n is to be us ed f o r re fe re nce purpo se s o nly . The City o f Ma nka to do es no t gua rante e ac cura cy o f the ma ter ia l c o nta ine d he rei n a nd is no t res pons ible f o r mi sus e o r mis inte rpreta tio n. % Date: Februar y 2026 Author : ## General Location Map This inf or ma ti o n is to be us ed f o r re fe re nce purpo se s o nly . The City o f Ma nka to do es no t gua rante e ac cura cy o f the ma ter ia l c o nta ine d he rei n a nd is no t res pons ible f o r mi sus e o r mis inte rpreta tio n. % Date: Februar y 2026 Author : ## Aerial Map ## EAGLE LAKE ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## L = 3 2 8 . 9 9 ## R = 2 0 2 3 . 4 8 ## Δ = 9 ° 1 8 ' 5 6 " ## C . = 3 2 8 . 6 3 ## C . ## B r g = ## S 4 1 ° 5 7 ' 1 7 " ## W ## N42°27'11"W 66.01 ## S47°32'49"W 66.00 ## N42°27'11"W 219.74 ## N21°16'44"W 290± ## N44°46'48"W 571± ## N35°01'36"E 303.67 ## S42°27'11"E 207.40 ## S00°20'33"E 89.00 ## S45°10'33"E 78.50 ## L = 7 3 . 7 6 ## R = 1 1 5 1 . 2 7 ## Δ = 3 ° 4 0 ' 1 5 " 134.34 ## 1/2" Iron Pipe ## 1/2" Iron Pipe 1/4" Iron 5/8" Iron 1/2" Iron 75.20 80± 61.67 55± 133.48 320.22 ## N42°27'11"W 273.41 ## Permanent Drainage Easement ## per B.E.C. R.O.W. PLAT No. 28 30 30 ## LOT 1 ## BLOCK 1 ## Former Parcel 6 ## B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## Former Parcel 5 ## B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## Former R.O.W. - C.S.A.H. No. 26 ## Gov't Lot 5, Sec. 36-109-26 269± ## S'ly Line - Outlot E ## N'ly Line Lot 4, Block 2 ## Water's Edge November 19, 2025 Elev - 988.1 (NAVD88) ## SW'ly Line Lot 4, Block 2 ## Controlled Access per B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## NW'ly Corner - Former Parcel 6 ## B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## NE'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## NE'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SW'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SW'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SW'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SE'ly Line ## Parcel D-1 ## Survey Line ## SE'ly Line Lot 4, Block 2 ## NW'ly Line ## Parcel D-2 ## S49°36'32"E ## Center of Radius 0 ## SCALE IN FEET 4080 ## BEARING NOTE: The orientation of this bearing system is based on plat of EAGLE BLUFF. ## BENCHMARK: ## MNDOT Monument - Jamestown SW Elevation - 1034.64 (NAVD88) ## INSTRUMENT OF DEDICATION KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Mark J. Burgess and Rachel E. Burgess, husband and wife, owners of the following described property: Lot Four (4), Block Two (2), Hilgers' Subdivision No. 2 according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Blue Earth County, Minnesota. ## AND All of Parcel D-2 and that part of Parcel D-1, all according to Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 28, on file and of record with the ## Blue Earth County Recorder, described as: Beginning at the northwesterly corner of Parcel 6 of said Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 28; thence North 21 degrees 16 minutes 44 seconds West, ( Minnesota County Coordinate System - Blue Earth County Zone - NAD83 - 1986), along the northeasterly line of said Parcel D-1, a distance of 134.34 feet; thence North 42 degrees 27 minutes 11 seconds West, along said northeasterly line, 219.74 feet; thence South 47 degrees 32 minutes 49 seconds West, 66.00 feet to a point on the southwesterly line of said Parcel D-1; thence South 42 degrees 27 minutes 11 seconds East, along said southwesterly line, 207.40 feet; thence South 00 degrees 20 minutes 33 seconds East, along said southwesterly line, 89.00 feet; thence South 45 degrees 10 minutes 33 seconds East, along said southwesterly line, 78.50 feet to a point on a circular curve which center of radius bears South 49 degrees 36 minutes 32 seconds East; thence northeasterly, along the southeasterly line of said Parcel D-1, along a 1151.27 radius curve, central angle = 03 degrees 40 minutes 15 seconds, an arc distance 73.76 feet to the point of beginning. ## AND All of the formerly occupied right of way of 230 Street (C.S.A.H. No. 26) lying over and across that part of Government Lot 5 in Section 36, Township 109 North, Range 26 West, Blue Earth County, Minnesota, which lies northwesterly of the northwesterly line of Parcel D-2, southwesterly of Parcel 6 and northeasterly of Parcel 5, all according to Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 28, on file and of record with the Blue Earth County Recorder. ## AND Outlot D and Outlot E, Eagle Bluff, Blue Earth County, Minnesota Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as RAEMAR ADDITION. In witness whereof said Mark J. Burgess and Rachel E. Burgess, husband and wife, have hereunto set their hands this _______ day of ___________________, 20_____. __________________________________________ __________________________________________ Mark J. Burgess Rachel E. Burgess State of ____________________________ County of ____________________________ This instrument was acknowledged before me on _______________________, 20_____ by Mark J. Burgess and Rachel E. Burgess. __________________________________________ (sign) __________________________________________ (print) ## Notary Public ___________________________ ## My Commission Expires ________________ ## LIME TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION Be it known that on this the _________________ day of _____________________, 20_____, the Planning Commission of Lime Township, Minnesota did duly approve this plat of RAEMAR ADDITION. _________________________________ _________________________________ Chair Person Secretary ## LINE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Be it known that on this the _________________ day of _____________________, 20_____, the Lime Township Board of Commissioners, did duly review this plat of RAEMAR ADDITION, and that, as Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2, this plat has been submitted to and written comments and recommendations have been received from the Blue Earth County Highway Engineer. _________________________________ _________________________________ Chair Person Board Secretary ## TITLE OPINION I, ______________________________________, Licensed Attorney, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the owners as indicated hereon represent all ownership interest in the land encompassed by this plat, this ________________ day of _______________________, 20_____. _______________________________________________ ## Licensed Attorney ## BLUE EARTH COUNTY PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES I hereby certify that there are no delinquent taxes and/or delinquent special assessments, that the current taxes have ben paid and that the transfer has been entered on the land described herein on the _______ day of ___________________, 20_____. _______________________________________________ ## Blue Earth County Property and Environmental Resources Director ## COUNTY RECORDER, BLUE EARTH COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this plat of RAEMAR ADDITION was filed in the office of the County Recorder for public record on this _______ day of ___________________, 20_____, at ____________ o'clock _____.M. and was duly filed in Book _______ of Plats, page _______, as Document No. ______________________. ______________________________________ ## Blue Earth, County Recorder ## Iron Monument Found ## Indicates 1/2" Dia. Iron Monument ## Set With Plastic Cap Marked ## By ISG, PLS No. 61565 to be set before time of recording ## LEGEND ## FINAL PLAT FOR REVIEW ## RAEMAR ADDITION ## JOB # 33616 DATE: 4/28/2026 ## SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, Ryan E. Kotthoff, do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have been or, will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. Dated this _______ day of ___________________, 20_____. ___________________________________________________________ ## Ryan E. Kotthoff, Licensed Land Surveyor ## Minnesota License No. 61565 ## State of Minnesota ## County of Blue Earth This instrument was acknowledged before me on _______________________, 20_____ by Ryan E. Kotthoff, Licensed Land Surveyor. ___________________________________________ ## Kent A. Hays ## Notary Public, Minnesota ## My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2030 ## NW 1/4 SEC. 36, TWP. 109, RGE. 26 ## EAGLE ## VICINITY MAP ## (NOT TO SCALE) ## Blue Earth County, Minnesota ## N ## NW 1/4 ## NW 1/4 ## NE 1/4 ## NW 1/4 ## SW 1/4 ## NW 1/4 ## SE 1/4 ## NW 1/4 ## LAKE ## CSAH No. 26 ## SITE ## Property & Environmental Resources ## Government Center, 410 South Fifth Street ## P.O. Box 3566, Mankato, Minnesota 56002-3566 Phone: (507) 304-4251 ## Septic, Well, and Shoreland-Wetland Review ## Project Information: Request of Kent Hays, on behalf of the property owners, Mark and Rachel Burgess, for a final plat for an adjustment of property lines that will create a new parcel combing a total of four lots in 2026. ## Date Printed:May 14, 2026Review Number:PR20260220 ## Property Owner:BURGESS MARK J & RACHEL ## E ## Applicant:Kent Hays ## Parcel Number: ## R40.04.36.177.004R40.04.36.177. ## 007R40.04.36.177.011R40.04.36.1 77.012 ## Location Address: ## 59618 230TH ST, MADISON ## LAKE, MN 56063 ## Septic Review ## Status: ## Complete ## Comments: The septic system serving the existing house is compliant and it appears the parcel has adequate space for a secondary drainfield location when needed. The proposed final plat does not seem to negatively impact the current or future septic situation on the property. No additional requirements at this time. Anderson Jesse 05/11/2026 11:59 AM ## Well Review ## Status: ## Complete ## Comments: A previously enclosed site survey indicates the property contains one in-use well. A review of the records indicates that the in-use well, unique # 652900, was drilled in 2001 by Jadd Seppmann & Sons. This review additionally identified one sealed well, unique # H184341. This well was sealed in 2001 by Jadd Seppmann & Sons. The proposed final plat does not appear to negatively impact the known well situation on this property. grant 05/14/2026 4:24 ## PM ## Shoreland-Wetland Review ## Status: ## Complete ## Comments: The proposed request does not appear that it will negatively impact any wetlands. A wetland Delineation was completed prior to platting that identified regulated resources. Any future development on the parcels must be in compliance with the Wetland Conservation Act. Lynch Dane 05/14/2026 1:22 PM ## From: Nick McCabe <Nick.McCabe@ISGInc.com> ## Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2026 3:26 PM ## To: Kent Hays <Kent.Hays@ISGInc.com> ## Subject: RE: 59618 230TH ST Madison Lake ## Kent, There does not appear to be any wetlands on the property currently, nor were there any indications of wetlands prior to the road realignment. I’m 99% sure there are no wetlands on those parcels based on a desktop review of historic aerials, the National Wetland Inventory, soil survey maps and LiDAR elevation data that are publicly available. Let me know if you have any questions or need anything else. Thanks ## Nick McCabe ## Senior Environmental Scientist ## Employee Owner ## P 507.387.6651 ## C 507.330.4786 ## E Nick.McCabe@ISGInc.com ## W ISGInc.com ## From: Kent Hays <Kent.Hays@ISGInc.com> ## Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2026 2:09 PM ## To: Nick McCabe <Nick.McCabe@ISGInc.com> ## Subject: 59618 230TH ST Madison Lake Hey Nick, we are platting the 4 parcels outlined in orange on the 1st attachment into 1 lot. The parcels are also outlined on both sheets of the 2nd attachment The City is helping with the review for Lime Twp and is asking if there are any wetlands on the property. Is there a way you can look at historical photos to see if there might be anything on the property? The plat of Eagle Bluff was done 10 years ago so you would think that they would have had to take a look for wetlands when they platted it and it is not showing anything. Let me know if you have any questions or would like to talk through things. ## Thanks, ## Kent ## S'ly Line - Outlot E ## N'ly Line Lot 4, Block 2 ## SE'ly Line Lot 4, Block 2 ## Water's Edge November 19, 2025 Elev - 988.1 (NAVD88) ## SW'ly Line Lot 4, Block 2 ## EAGLE LAKE ## Controlled Access per B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## I=1019.72 ## I=1020.47 ## R=1017.95 ## EX DROP INTAKE ## W ## I=1006.39 ## I=998.32 ## W ## U ## R=1014.06 ## EX MH ## R=1012.46 ## EX MH ## AC ## GM ## G ## I=1020.42 ## I=1020.52 ## G ## I=1019.66 ## G ## MB ## I=1019.00 ## R=1021.51 ## EX MH ## U ## FO ## R=1013.38 ## EX DROP INTAKE >> ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## W ## X ## X ## X ## X ## X ## V >> >> ## NW'ly Corner - Former Parcel 6 ## B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## NE'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## L = 3 2 8 . 9 9 ## R = 2 0 2 3 . 4 8 ## Δ = 9 ° 1 8 ' 5 6 " ## C . = 3 2 8 . 6 3 ## C . ## B r g = ## S 4 1 ° 5 7 ' 1 7 " ## W ## N42°27'11"W 66.01 ## S47°32'49"W 66.00 ## N42°27'11"W 219.74 ## N21°16'44"W 290± ## N44°46'48"W 571± ## N35°01'36"E 303.67 ## S42°27'11"E 207.40 ## S00°20'33"E 89.00 ## S45°10'33"E 78.50 ## L = 7 3 . 7 6 ## R = 1 1 5 1 . 2 7 ## Δ = 3 ° 4 0 ' 1 5 " 134.34 ## NE'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SW'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SW'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SW'ly Line - Parcel D-1 ## SE'ly Line ## Parcel D-1 ## NW'ly Line ## Parcel D-2 ## SE'ly Line ## Parcel D-2 ## 1/2" Iron Pipe ## 1/2" Iron Pipe 1/4" Iron 5/8" Iron 1/2" Iron 75.20 80± 61.67 55± 133.48 320.22 ## N42°27'11"W 273.41 ## Permanent Drainage Easement ## per B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 30 30 1020 1019 1021 1021 1020 1019 1018 1017 1016 1015 1014 1013 1012 1012 1013 1013 1012 1013 1015 1012 1011 1010 1010 1011 1009 1008 1007 1008 1006 1010 1007 1000 995 990 989 990 1006 1000 1005 1004 1010 1012 1014 1011 1021 1022 1021 1019 1020 1021 1020 1019 1018 1018 1016 1015 1012 1021 1023 1020 1019 1020 1012 1013 1013 1014 1015 1017 1017 1007 1015 1014 1015 1018 1019 1020 1017 1020 1016 1018 1019 1017 1016 ## Survey Line ## LOT 1 ## BLOCK 1 1020 ## Septic Mound ## Garden 269± ## Former Parcel 6 ## B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## Former Parcel 5 ## B.E.C. R.O.W. Plat No. 28 ## Former R.O.W. - C.S.A.H. No. 26 ## Gov't Lot 5, Sec. 36-109-26 1013 1013 1017 ## 33616 EX SITE ## DATE ## REVISION SCHEDULE ## DESCRIPTIONBY ## SHEET ## TITLE ## PROJECT ## PROJECT NO. ## FILE NAME ## DESIGNED BY ## ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE ## DRAWN BY ## CLIENT PROJECT NO. ## REVIEWED BY ## DWG LOCATION: S:\PROJECTS\33000 PROJ\33600-33699\33616 59618 230TH STREET-MADISON LAKE MN\33616 PRODUCTION FILES\33616 CIVIL 3D\SURVEY PRODUCTION DWGS\33616 EX SITE.DWG ## SAVED BY: ## JESSICA.WENDINGER ## THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF I & S GROUP, ## INC. AND MAY NOT BE USED, COPIED OR DUPLICATED ## WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. ## © 2024 I & S GROUP, INC. ## 1OF 1 - --/--/-- 25-33616 ## XX-XX SHEET TITLE 300 PROJ. NO (no year) XX-XX ## BLUE EARTH COUNTYMINNESOTA ## SITE PLAN 0 ## SCALE IN FEET 4080 ## JW --- ## REK ## 59618 230TH ST. ## MADISON LAKE ## LEGEND >> ## W ## X ## W ## MB ## GM ## U ## FO ## AC ## Bituminous Surface ## Concrete Surface ## Existing Building ## Gravel Surface ## Controlled Access Line ## Storm Sewer Line ## Landscaping Edge ## Building Canopy Or Deck Line ## Water's Edge ## Treeline ## Fence ## Field Edge ## Surface Drainage Direction ## Iron Monument Found RLS 46564 unless otherwise noted ## Air Conditioner ## Gas Meter ## Transformer ## Utility Marker ## Utility Pedestal ## Utility Vault ## Yard Hydrant ## Well ## Cleanout ## Drop Intake ## Flared End Section/Apron ## Roof Drain ## Downspout ## Mailbox ## Post ## Sign ## Coniferous Tree ## Deciduous Tree ## I=100.00 ## V ## I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN, OR REPORT WAS ## PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A ## DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF ## MINNESOTA. ## DATE ## LIC. NO. 1/13/2661565 ## RYAN E. KOTTHOFF ## Lime Township Planning Commission 4. 2. ## Meeting Date:05/28/2026 ## Title ## CYL-0005-26 Request of Jim Hilgers, the property owner, for a final plat to create a new parcel, Lot 1 Block 1 of Eagle Bluff No.2. The subject property is described as Outlot A, Eagle Bluff, Lime Township, Blue Earth County (PID R400436178007). And that part of Parcels H and H-1, according to Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 18: Beginning at the Southeasterly corner of said parcel H-1; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 33 seconds West, (Minnesota County Coordinate Systems- Blue Earth County Zone- NAD83- 1986), along the easterly line of said Parcels H-1 and H, a distance of 241.28 feet to the northwesterly corner of Outlot A, Eagle Bluff, according to the plat thereof on file and of record with the Blue Earth County Recorder; thence North 56 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 62.73 feet; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 33 seconds East, a distance of 276.38 feet to a point on the southerly line of said Parcel H-1; thence North 89 degrees 58 minutes 15 seconds East, along said southerly line, a distance of 52.00 feet to the point of the beginning. The anticipated date of Lime Township Board action is June 9, 2026, at 7:30 p.m. at the Mankato Regional Airport. ## Applicant The applicant, Jim Hilgers, is the applicant and property owner. ## Request Request of Jim Hilgers for a final plat to create a new parcel. ## Location The subject property is described as Outlot A, Eagle Bluff, Lime Township, Blue Earth County (PID R400436178007). And that part of Parcels H and H-1, according to Blue Earth County Highway Right of Way Plat No. 18: Beginning at the Southeasterly corner of said parcel H-1; thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 33 seconds West, (Minnesota County Coordinate Systems- Blue Earth County Zone- NAD83- 1986), along the easterly line of said Parcels H-1 and H, a distance of 241.28 feet to the northwesterly corner of Outlot A, Eagle Bluff, according to the plat thereof on file and of record with the Blue Earth County Recorder; thence North 56 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West, a distance of 62.73 feet; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 33 seconds East, a distance of 276.38 feet to a point on the southerly line of said Parcel H-1; thence North 89 degrees 58 minutes 15 seconds East, along said southerly line, a distance of 52.00 feet to the point of the beginning. ## Existing Land Use The land consists of a parcel located East of Eagle Lake and was previously used for agricultural purposes. ## Zoning The property is located in Lime Township and is zoned Agriculture. The property is located in Lime Township and is zoned Agriculture. ## Environmentally Sensitive Areas The property is located in the Shoreland District and contains a wetland on the southwest corner of the lot. ## City Code ## The Lime Township Ordinance can be found at this link: Lime Township Ordinances The Mankato Regional Airport Zoning Ordinance can be found at this link: Mankato Regional Airport Zoning ## Ordinance ## Review This request, submitted by Jim Hilgers, seeks approval of a final plat to establish a new parcel into Lot 1, Block 1 of Eagle Bluff No. 2. The property encompasses approximately 2.70 acres and is located primarily within Airport Flight Zone A, with a portion extending into Flight Zone B. In June 2025, the applicant applied for an administrative land split to combine a purchased 0.3‑acre portion of an adjacent property with the existing parcel, thereby increasing the total lot size to 3.0 acres. This split was reviewed, approved, and signed by Township staff. The condition of the approved preliminary plat required the applicant to record the approved administrative land split with the Blue Earth County Recorder’s Office prior to submitting an application for the final plat. The applicant submitted the approved administrative land split which described what was to be split and recorded at Blue Earth County Records. The parcel is situated within the Agriculture Zoning District, which permits single‑family, non‑farm dwellings. The Lime Township Zoning Ordinance states: “The following uses shall be permitted within the A Agriculture District: Single family, non-farm dwellings” (Article 4, Section 2, Part B, Subpart 4). Accordingly, the anticipated future residential use of the parcel is consistent with the permitted uses in the Agriculture District. However, the Agriculture District requires a minimum of one acre of buildable area for single‑family dwellings. The applicant’s lot includes approximately 0.49 acres of buildable area. In January 2026, the applicant submitted a variance request to reduce the required buildable area from 1.0 acre to 0.49 acre. This variance was approved with conditions at the March 2026 Lime Township Board meeting (Article 4, Section 2, Part F, Subpart 1). Prior to any construction of a single‑family dwelling, the applicant must obtain a land development permit. The proposed lot configuration meets the minimum lot width and depth requirements described in the Lime Township Zoning Ordinance: “Every lot or plot of land on which a dwelling is erected shall have a minimum width of not less than one hundred fifty (150) feet at the building setback line and a minimum depth of not less than one hundred seventy-five (175) feet” (Article 4, Section 2, Part F, Subpart 3). The site plan shows a minimum lot width of 350 feet and a minimum lot depth of 276.38 feet, demonstrating compliance with the ordinance. The applicant submitted documentation from J.R. Bruender Construction illustrating the placement of a Subsurface Treatment System (SSTS) on the site. A preliminary plat condition required the applicant to coordinate with Blue Earth County to obtain approval for the septic system location and Well. The applicant coordinated with Blue Earth County, and the County has provided commentary that the “proposed final plat does not seem to negatively impact the future septic situation on the property”. Additionally, the county provided commentary about wells onsite, stating “a review of the records does not indicate the likely presence of any wells on this property. This final plat request does not appear to negatively impact the known well situation on this property.” The applicant has fulfilled the condition and is in compliance with Blue Earth County. Site access will remain unchanged, continuing from Cody Lane onto Lake View Road, as identified in the submitted plans. Any modifications to access will require additional review and approval by the Township Board and Blue Earth County. Outlot A, located in the southwestern corner of the property, contains a wetland. No impacts to this wetland are proposed or authorized. A wetland delineation report prepared by Bolton & Menk confirms the presence of the wetland on Outlot A. The property owner must continue to comply with Lime Township zoning regulations, Blue Earth County requirements, and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources standards to ensure the protection and preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. A completed Preliminary and Final Title Opinion letter, prepared by the developer’s attorney, has been submitted in the final plat application as requested during the preliminary plat report. ## Findings Staff respectfully submits the following findings: The proposed use will ensure that, to the maximum extent possible, all lands will be developed with adequate protection provided for the health and safety of residents by requiring necessary services such as properly designed streets and adequate sewage and water service. The applicant will be coordinating plans with Blue Earth County for the placement of a septic system and well. 1. The applicant will continually work with Blue Earth County and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to ensure that effective protection is given to the natural resources of the community, especially groundwater and surface waters within the property. 2. The proposed final plat encourages a well-planned division of land through the establishment of adequate design standards, given that the request aligns well with the lot requirements within the Agriculture district. 3. The Final Plat will not cause inferior developments that might adversely affect the local tax base, given that the use aligns with the surrounding area, residential. 4. The proposal does not place the cost of improvement against those benefiting from their construction, since the request is to utilize the lot for residential use. 5. The Final Plat’s outcome will contribute to the established neighborhood, which will be of lasting credit to the community. 6. The proposed use will not affect the township or county in facilitating adequate provisions for transportation and other public facilities. 7. The proposal does secure the rights of the public with respect to public lands and waters.8. The approval of the final plat will improve land records by the establishment of standards for land divisions, surveys, and plats. 9. The safeguard the interests of the public, the homeowner, the subdivider, and local units of government will remain intact since the use will be similar to the surrounding area. 10. The applicant will prevent, where possible, excessive governmental operating and maintenance costs.11. ## Recommendation Based on conformance with the conditions of the preliminary plat, staff recommends approval of the final plat. ## Attachments ## General Location Map ## Aerial Map ## Final Plat ## Approved Admin Land Split ## Subsurface Treatment System ## Blue Earth County Review ## Wetland Delineation Report ## Title Opinion This inf or ma ti o n is to be us ed f o r re fe re nce purpo se s o nly . The City o f Ma nka to do es no t gua rante e ac cura cy o f the ma ter ia l c o nta ine d he rei n a nd is no t res pons ible f o r mi sus e o r mis inte rpreta tio n. % ## Date: March 2026 Author : ## General Location Map This inf or ma ti o n is to be us ed f o r re fe re nce purpo se s o nly . The City o f Ma nka to do es no t gua rante e ac cura cy o f the ma ter ia l c o nta ine d he rei n a nd is no t res pons ible f o r mi sus e o r mis inte rpreta tio n. % ## Date: March 2026 Author : ## Aerial Map ## SE CORNER ## PARCEL H-1 ## (POINT OF BEGINNING ## LOT 1 ## BLOCK 1 489.67 52.00 ## N 00°00'33" W 276.38 ## N 73°13'47" E 155.51 ## L = 9 2 . 7 2 ## R = 2 4 9 . 9 7 ## Δ = 2 1 ° 1 5 ' 0 9 " ## S 56°00'00" E 62.73 ## N 73°13'47" E 38.82 ## L = 1 0 3 . 0 0 ## R = 9 1 . 9 2 ## Δ = 6 4 ° 1 2 ' 0 0 " ## S 80°58'13" E 95.52 ## L = 4 7 . 7 9 ## R = 3 3 . 9 8 ## Δ = 8 0 ° 3 5 ' 0 0 " ## S 00°23'13" E 146.52 ## 3.00 ACRES ## S 16°46'13" E 50.00 ## S 89°58'15" W 541.67 100 50 36.40 ## N 21°44'21" E 55.68 ## N 66°31'52" E 42.26 ## S 80°13'55" E 39.02 ## S 16°22'47" E 68.70 ## S 69°10'01" E 90.86 150.12 121 ## S 88°20'56" W 11934.36 ## BENCHMARK ## MNDOT MONUMENT 0714 T ## BECO NAD83 - 2011 ADJ ## N 229657.631 ## E 583191.905 ## ELEV = 998.14 ## FIELD BOOK:JOB NUMBER:DRAWN BY: ## BOLTON & MENK, INC. ## THIS PLAT PREPARED BY ## OFFICIAL PLAT ## EAGLE BLUFF NO. 2 ## R ## SCALE IN FEET 050100 H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\CAD\C3D\137409V-PLTP1.dwg 4/30/2026 11:39 AM ## LINES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. ## BEING 10.0 FEET IN WIDTH, ADJOINING SIDE ## LOT LINES, AND 20.00 FEET IN WIDTH ## ADJOINING STREET LINES AND REAR LOT ## EASEMENTS ARE AS THUS: ## DRAINAGE & UTILITY 20 10 10 ## INSTRUMENT OF DEDICATION KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Eagle Bluff Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, owner of the following described property situated in the County of Blue Earth, State of Minnesota: Outlot A, EAGLE BLUFF, according to the recorded plat thereof, Blue Earth County, Minnesota. do hereby declare that we have caused the above described property to be surveyed and platted and monuments to be set, that we have named said platted area EAGLE BLUFF NO. 2, and do hereby donate and dedicate to the public for the public use forever the easements as shown hereon. In witness whereof said Eagle Bluff Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this _______ day of ____________________ , 2026. ## Signed: Eagle Bluff Properties, LLC ## __________________________________________, Chief Manager ## NOTARY CERTIFICATE ## State of Minnesota ## County of Blue Earth On this the _______ day of _______________________ , 2026, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared Eagle Bluff Properties, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, known by me to be the person named in the foregoing instrument and who did acknowledge said instrument to be their act and deed. _________________________________ ______________________ , Notary Public ## Notary Public-Minnesota, ## My Commission Expires _______________ ## SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, Michael M. Eichers, do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. Dated this ____ day of _________________ , 2026. _______________________________ ## Michael M. Eichers ## Licensed Land Surveyor ## Minnesota License No. 46564 On this the ____ day of ____________ , 2026, before me a Notary Public in and for said County, personally appeared Michael M. Eichers, and being duly sworn did say that he has executed the foregoing instrument. _______________________________ ## Nathan P. Myhra, Notary Public ## Notary Public-Minnesota, ## My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2028 ## LIME TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION Be it known that on this the ____ day of __________ , 2026, the Lime Township Planning Commission, Blue Earth County, Minnesota did duly review this plat of EAGLE BLUFF NO. 2. _______________________________ _________________________________ Chair person: Secretary: ## LIME TOWNSHIP BOARD Be it known that on this the ____ day of ___________ , 2026, the Lime Township Board, Blue Earth County, Minnesota did duly approve this plat of EAGLE BLUFF NO. 2 and that as per M.S. 505.03 Subd. 2, this plat has been submitted to and written comments and recommendations have been received from the Commissioner of Transportation. ______________________________ _________________________________ Chair person: Board Secretary: ## BLUE EARTH COUNTY SANITARIAN Be it known that on this the _____________ day of _____________ , 2026, the County Sanitarian of Blue Earth County did duly review this plat of EAGLE BLUFF NO. 2, and confirmed that two suitable on-site sewage treatment sites exist on the lot based on information submitted by ___________________ , an MPCA Certified on-site septic system designer. _________________________________ ## Blue Earth County Sanitarian ## TITLE OPINION I, Karl O. Friedrichs, licensed attorney, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that the owners as indicated hereon have good record title in fee simple absolute and that the public is vested with those right of way rights as indicated on the plat. ## Karl O. Friedrichs ## _________________________, Licensed Attorney ## BLUE EARTH COUNTY ENGINEER This plat was approved by the County Engineer, the ______ day of _____________, 2026. _____________________________ ______Registration No. ____________________. ## Blue Earth County Engineer ## BLUE EARTH COUNTY PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES I hereby certify that there are no delinquent taxes and/or delinquent special assessments, that the current taxes have been paid and that the transfer has been entered on the land described herein on the _____ day of ______________ , 2026. _______________________________________________________ ## Blue Earth County Property and Environmental Resources Director ## BLUE EARTH COUNTY RECORDER I hereby certify that this instrument was filed in my office for record on this, the ____ day of _______________ , 2026, at ___ o'clock, _ .m., and that it was duly recorded on __________ Plats, Number ______________________. _________________________________ ## Blue Earth County Recorder ## 3/4" IRON PIPE MONUMENT SET ## MARKED BY LIC. NO. 46564 ## MONUMENT FOUND ## LEGEND ## Horizontal Datum: Blue Earth County Coordinate System (2011 Adj.) ## LIME TOWNSHIP ## BLUE EARTH COUNTY ## 230TH STREET ## 594TH AVENUE ## VICINITY MAP ## SEC. 36-108-26 ## NOT TO SCALE ## EAGLE LAKE ## LAKE VIEW ROAD ## NW 1/4 ## SEC. 36-109-26 ## SITE ## Property & Environmental Resources ## Government Center, 410 South Fifth Street ## P.O. Box 3566, Mankato, Minnesota 56002-3566 Phone: (507) 304-4251 ## Septic, Well, and Shoreland-Wetland Review ## Project Information: Request of Jim Hilgers, the property owner, for a final plat to create one new parcel in 2026 ## Date Printed: May 14, 2026 ## Review Number: ## PR20260219 ## Property Owner: ## EAGLE BLUFF PROPERTIES ## LLC ## Applicant: ## EAGLE BLUFF PROPERTIES LLC ## Parcel Number: ## R40.04.36.178.007 ## Location Address: ## T.B.D. ## Septic Review ## Status: ## Complete ## Comments: Two septic drainfield locations have been identified by J.R. Bruender Construction. The proposed final plat does not seem to negatively impact the future septic situation on the property. No additional requirements at this time. Anderson Jesse 05/11/2026 11:59 AM ## Well Review ## Status: ## Complete ## Comments: The enclosed site plan / survey does not show any wells on this property. A review of the records does not indicate the likely presence of any wells on this property. This final plat request does not appear to negatively impact the known well situation on this property. grant ## 05/14/2026 4:22 PM ## Shoreland-Wetland Review ## Status: ## Complete ## Comments: The proposed request does not appear that it will negatively impact any wetlands. A wetland Delineation was completed prior to platting that identified regulated resources. Any future development on the parcels must be in compliance with the Wetland Conservation Act. Lynch Dane 05/14/2026 1:22 PM Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. ## 1960 Premier Drive ## Mankato, MN 65001 ## P: (507) 625-4171 ## BMI Project No. 25X.137409.000 ## Eagle Bluff ## Type & Boundary Application ## Lime Township, Blue Earth County, Minnesota ## Jim Hilgers August 6, 2025 ## Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Table of Contents Eagle Bluff | 25X.137409.000 ## Table Of Contents PART ONE: APPLICANT INFORMATION ........................................................................................................ 1 PART TWO: SITE LOCATION INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 1 PART THREE: GENERAL PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION ................................................................................ 1 PART FOUR: AQUATIC RESOURCE IMPACT SUMMARY .............................................................................. 2 PART FIVE: APPLICANT SIGNATURE ............................................................................................................ 2 ATTACHMENT A ........................................................................................................................................... 3 ATTACHMENT B ........................................................................................................................................... 3 ## Appendix ## 2013 WETLAND DELINEATION (R. J. HANNA & ASSOCIATES INC.) ## MANKATO PLANNING COMMISION NOTES 2016 ## WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 1 ## Eagle Bluff ## 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: Jim Hilgers Mailing Address: 171 Miranda Trail | Madison Lake, MN | 56063 Phone: 507-351-3265 ## E-mail Address: Jihil63@gmail.com Authorized Contact (do not complete if same as above): ## Mailing Address: ## Phone: ## E-mail Address: Agent Name: Bolton & Menk, Inc. | Cortiney Galuska | Natural Resource Technician ## Mailing Address: 1960 Premier Drive | Mankato, MN | 56001 Phone: 507-625-4171 ext 4074 ## E-mail Address: Cortiney.galuska@bolton-menk.com ## PART TWO: Site Location Information ## County: Blue Earth City/Township: Lime Township ## Parcel ID and/or Address: Note Exhibit A Legal Description (Section, Township, Range): 36, 109N, 26W Lat/Long (decimal degrees): 44.049090, -93.9021158 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): 8.59 ac 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. Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 2 ## Eagle Bluff ## PART FOUR: Aquatic Resource Impact 1 ## Summary If your proposed project involves a direct or indirect impact to an aquatic resource (wetland, lake, tributary, etc.) identify each impact in the table below. Include all anticipated impacts, including those expected to be temporary. Attach an overhead view map, aerial photo, and/or drawing showing all of the aquatic resources in the project area and the location(s) of the proposed impacts. Label each aquatic resource on the map with a reference number or letter and identify the impacts in the following table. ## Aquatic Resource ID (as noted on overhead view) ## Aquatic ## Resource Type (wetland, lake, tributary etc.) ## Type of Impact (fill, excavate, drain, or remove vegetation) Duration of ## Impact Permanent (P) or Temporary ## (T) 1 ## Size of Impact 2 ## Overall Size of ## Aquatic ## Resource 3 ## Existing Plant ## Community Type(s) in ## Impact Area 4 ## County, Major Watershed #, and Bank ## Service Area # ## of Impact Area 5 1 If impacts are temporary; enter the duration of the impacts in days next to the “T”. For example, a project with a temporary access fill that would be removed after 220 days would be entered “T (220)”. 2 Impacts less than 0.01 acre should be reported in square feet. Impacts 0.01 acre or greater should be reported as acres and rounded to the nearest 0.01 acre. Tributary impacts must be reported in linear feet of impact and an area of impact by indicating first the linear feet of impact along the flowline of the stream followed by the area impact in parentheses). For example, a project that impacts 50 feet of a stream that is 6 feet wide would be reported as 50 ft (300 square feet). 3 This is generally only applicable if you are applying for a de minimis exemption under MN Rules 8420.0420 Subp. 8, otherwise enter “N/A”. 4 Use Wetland Plants and Plant Community Types of Minnesota and Wisconsin 3 rd Ed. as modified in MN Rules 8420.0405 Subp. 2. 5 Refer to Major Watershed and Bank Service Area maps in MN Rules 8420.0522 Subp. 7. If any of the above identified impacts have already occurred, identify which impacts they are and the circumstances associated with each: ## N/A ## 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 Bolton & Menk, Inc 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. Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 3 ## Eagle Bluff ## 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.). 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 Minnesota Interagency Water Resource Application Form February 2014 Page 4 ## Eagle Bluff ## Attachment B ## Supporting Information for Applications Involving Exemptions, No ## Loss Determinations, and Activities Not Requiring Mitigation Complete this part if you maintain that the identified aquatic resource impacts in Part Four do not require wetland replacement/compensatory mitigation OR if you are seeking verification that the proposed water resource impacts are either exempt from replacement or are not under CWA/WCA jurisdiction. Identify the specific exemption or no-loss provision for which you believe your project or site qualifies: ## 8420.0150.D- Incidental Wetlands 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: ## 8420.0105.D- Incidental Wetlands The parcel in question is currently half industrial row cropped agriculture and half storm water pond. The entire property was farmed for generations before the storm water pond’s construction in the late 2000’s. The incidental wetland in question was constructed in non-hydric upland soil (Exhibit E) that previously did not show any wetland indicators (Exhibit 1). Therefore, the applicant is requesting that this wetland be considered incidental under the WCA. A 2013 delineation from R. J. Hannah Associates Inc. was conducted and found no wetland present at the location of the cconstructed storm pond. In addition, attached site construction plans for the storm water pond from the City of Mankato. ## Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Appendix ## Eagle Bluff| 25X.137409.000 ## Appendix ## Minnesota Wetland Conservation ## Act ## Application for Approval of Wetland Type and Boundary l. ProjecUSite lnformation ## ProjecUSite ## Name: Re-plat of Hilgers SubdivisonLocal Government ## Unit: ## Blue Earth ## County ## Location: ## West-half of the NE ## Quarter of the NW ## Quarter of Govt. ## Lot2, of ## Section 36, ## T109N, ## R26W. ## 2. Applicant Information ## Applicant Name: James Hilgers Address: ## 23401597th Avenue, Madison Lake MN, 56063 ## E-mail: NA ## Phone: NA 3. AgenUGonsu ltant I nformation ## Company Name: R. J. Hanna & Associates lnc. Contact ## Person: Rick Hanna ## Address: 217 Lincoln ## Street ## City, State, Zip: Mankato, Mn 56001 E-mail: rjhanna@hickoMech.net ## Phone: 507-345-7066 Check allthat apply: 4. Description of Request ## X Wetland Boundary (must attach wetland delineation report) ## tr Wetland Type (Eggers & Reed and/or Circular 39 type) 5. Signature By signature below, the applicant requests a determination from ## the Local Government Unit under ## Minnesota Rules 8420.0225 on the submitted wetland boundary and type information in this application. ## Date: June 12,2013 ## Signature lmportant Notes: o ## The applicant may be required to submit multiple copies of the reporUinformation to the ## LGU. The LGU may require the applicant to submit copies directly to Technical ## Evaluation Panel Members. Check with your LGU regarding their submittal requirements. . ## The LGU decision must be made in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, section 15.99. FoTLGU useonly ## RECFI ## \"[D ## Date Received: ## I'i ## BWSR ## Wetland Boundary/Type Application ## Form Page 1 of 1 11t10t08 ## Hilgers ## Development ## Site ## Wetland ## Investigation ## Section 36 ## Lime ## Township ## Table of Contents ## INTRODUCTION ## METHOD ## RESULTS ## OFF-SITE, ## HiSTORICAL ## FINDINGS 2 ## National ## Wetland Inventorv of 1980 2 ## USDA ## Soil Survey of ## Blue ## Earth ## County ) ## Blue Earth ## County ## Protected S(/aters & !üetland ## Map 3 ## WetlandPrecipitationDataRetrievalTable,Section36,T109NR26'!ùü-3 ## Gridded Data-base 2012 ## Multi-month Ratin43 ## Gridded Data-base ## 2013 Multi-month Rating 3 ## USD,{ ## Crop Photos, 1979-1995 & lfetland Mapping ## Conventions Review Record_4 ## Comparison of the Tile Map, ## Plat Map & Soils ## Map ## ON SiTE FINDINGS ## Landscape ## Settins 4 ## On-Site I ## Results of the On-Site Investigation 5 ## OPINIONS 4 ## CONCLUSIONS ## JURISDICTIONAI ## CONTACT ## FINAL ## WETLÄND ## AUTHORITY ## LITERATURE ## REVIE'SüED 8 ## FIGURES lìigure 1: I.ocation Map. ## Fþre 2: Topographic l)ata & Collcction ## Sites ## Figurc 3: Âcrial ## Photo & Collcction ## Sitcs ## EXHIBITS [Ìxhibit ## r\: National Wetland ## Invenrorv Mao 11 ## Exhibit ## B: ## USDÀ Soil ## Survcv of Bluc Earth 12 ## ExhibitC:BlucF,arthCountyProtcctcdWatcrs&tùlctlandMap- ## Iixhibit D: ## Wedand Prccipitation l)ata ## Retricval 'fable, ## Section ## 36,'I'109N 1126\í_ llxhibit ## E: USD.A, ## Crop Photos, 1979-1995 ## & Wetland Mapping Convenrions lleview_ ## Iixhibit ## Iì: Comparison ## of the Tile Map, Plat ## Map & Soils Map, ## Exhibit ## G: Wedand ## Determination Data ## Shcets - ## Midwcst Vcrsion 11 14 15 16 17 19 ## Intoduction This wetland investigation wâs done at the request of ## James Flilgers 23401 597'r' Avcnuc, ## Madis<>n l,akc ## MN. The pu{pose was to identi$' ¿nd delineate âny wet-lands on thc property locatcd in thc ## Wcst-half c>f thc ## Northeast ## Quartet of the Northwest ## Quarter of Govt. lrot 2, of Section 36,'I'109N, R2(r\ü, llluc l,lartlr ## Count¡r, MN, figure 1). ## County Highway 26 is being moved to the north to modify thc curvc of thc highway fot safety pulposes. ## In doing so it affects the existing Hilgers ## Sul¡division ancl this is the rcason f<rr re-platting the property. ## Method ## The ## Federal Manual fot ldentiffng and DelineatingJurisdictional Wetlands. 1987 ¿nd the ## Midwest ## Regional SuPplement. 2008 wete the basis of the investigation. Historical resourccs wcrc rcvicwcd and representative on-site locations were investigated. The routine \evel2 method was used. 'lerry ## L.Ilovee, ## Ptofessional ## Soils ## Scientist, ## Minnesota ## License ## Number 30269,was the principal on-sirc invcstigator. ## Results ## R. ## J. ## Hanna & Âssociates Inc. conducted two field investigation of the property. Thc frst was on Septembet 74'h 201,2 and the second on May 72'-1'201,3. ## The off-site historical r".otd wâs rcscarchecl and the on-site vegetation, soils and hy&ology were examined. Based upon our investigation, it was determined that there are no wetlands on the site. ## Off-Site Historical ## Findin$ The following off-site historical resources were reviewed and are surrunarÞed below: ## National ## Wetland ## Inventory, 1980. ## In ## May of 1980, the ## U. S. ## Deparunent of Interior produced a series of aenal photographs of ## Blue ## Earth County. ## From these aedal photographs, the National ## Wetland Inventory, NWI, was developed. The ## NWI represents a wetland inventory of Blue ## Earth County as of May of 1980. Since the inventory was produced, rivets have meandered and some mâpped wetlands have been drained. At best, the NWI .^n only be used as a guide to on-site investigation. ## The ## NWI does not show any wetland on the property being platted. (ExhibitA) ## USDA ## Soils Survey of Blue ## Earth County. ## The ## USDA Soils ## Survey of ## Blue ## Earth Counry, @,xhibit ## B), was reviewed and the principal soils found across the site are summadzed below: ## Cotdova clay loam, 109 occupies 24.9 percent of the site. ## Cordova is found on the flats of moraines. ## The patent nyt9.i"l G a fine-loainy till The sþe is 0 to2percent and the shape is linear. ## This soil is poorþ drained and the depth to the seásonal water åble is 6 to i8 inches. ## Le ## Sueut clay loam, 239, occupies 24.3 petcntof the site. Iæ Sueur is found on the rises of moraines in a summit position. ## The down slope, 1 to 3 percent, is convex and linear across slope. The parent matenalis a fine loamy till. This is moderately well drained soil and the depth to the seasonal water table is 18 to 30 inches. ## No ponding or flooding is associated with this soil during latnfallevents. ## Kilkenny clay loam,238, occupics22.8 pcrccnt r>f thc sitc. IClkcnny is:rssociatcclrvith hills on moraines. ## The parent material is claycy lacustrinc dcposits ovcr fìnc-loamy till. 'l'hc slopc is 2 to ó percent and the down slope shape is convcx. Idlkcnny is a wcll clraincd soil soil and thc dc¡rth t<r the season¿l water t¿ble is 30 to 42 inchcs. ## Blue Earth ## County ## Protected ## Waters and Wetland Inventory, 1984. The inventory shows that ## Eagle Lake, ## PWI 7-60, is a protcctcd water of thc statc. 'l'hc lakc is in minor rvatershed 320821, of the ## Le Sueu¡ Rive¡. T'he highcst recorded lakc level is 989.75 fcct, (04/24/1969), and thc lowest, 986.2 feet, (04/1,2/1977). 'Ihe water level range is 3.55 feet. 'I'hc ## Ordinary Fligh \r)Øarcr ## Lcvel, ## (OH!Q, is 989.4 feet. ## Eagle Lake, (nottþ, is classified as a llecrcational ## Dcvelopmcnt ## Lakc, (l-,l,xhibit C). ## Wetland Delineation ## Ptecipitation ## Data ## Retrieval from a Gridded Data Base. ## The ## University of Minnesota ## Wetland Precipitation l)ata lìetrieval 'l'ablc, the s<¡urcc of thc 2012 prccipitation data for this site, was used in conjunction with the USDA crop photos. 'I'hc resuks of thc comparison are shown on the ## Wetland Mapping ## Conventions Review lìccotd, (fixhibit ## D). ## Gtidded ## Database-Multi-month ## Rating, 20l2,The multi-month rating for March, Âpril and ## May was 17, Wet. ## The following three months, ## June, ## July and August, reflect the beginnng of 2012 drought and the rating was 6, Dry. The data was retrieved from thc ## Wctland ## Delineation ## Precioitation ## Data ## Retdeval ftom a ## Gridded Database: ## Minnesota Climatology ## Working Group - ## Univetsity of Minnesota. ## A summaly of the previous 77 yearc of data regarding the rnean precipitation of Normal, Wet and ## Dry gowing seâsons furnished the following information: ## Greatet than ## Normal Ptecipitation. ## During the 8 years that were classified as being wet, 4 of the 8 yeats, 50o/o, of the time the vegetation appeared to l¡e normal with very few areas of crop stress. ## Normal Ptecipitation. ## Ove¡ the 6 years that had normal precipitation 1 year, 16.60/0, appeared to have a lot of crop stress. Overall the vegetation appeared normal, but included a few ateas of minor to vely minor crop stress during the normal years. ## Less than Normal Precipitation. Three of the years were classified as dry. ## Gridded ## Database-Multi-month ## Ratingr 2013. ## As of ## June 70'h 201.3, no data has been entered into the gridded data base for this site during 2013. ## Since the rainfall data from the rùØetland ## Delineation ## Precioitation ## Data ## Retrieval from ## a Gridded Data Base was not available fot 2013, it was decided to use the precipiøtion records at the University of Minnesoa ## Southem Research and ## Outreach ## Center at ÌüØaseca. ## The cumulative total of ptecipitation data recorded between ## Januzry 7"' and May 37" 2073 at the 'Waseca center indicate that the rainfall was 78.24 inches düing this period. The precipitation for these five months is 6.36 inches above ^ver^ge. ## From ## June 1" to ## June 10'h the iumulative tot¿l increased to 79.77 inches. ## This suggest that we are having a "wetter than normal" Spring. ## USDA ## Ctop Photos,l979-1995 & Wetland ## Mapping ## Conventions Review Recotd. The USDA. ## Aerial ## Crop ## Photogtaphs, 7979-7995, of ## Section 36 of Lime Township were reviewed. ## The purPose of the review u/as to determine if zny of the four sites shown on Figurã 2 displayed wetl¿nd sþatures during any growing seâson, (Exhibit ## E). ## Comparison of ## Hiþerc ## Tile ## M"p, the ## Plat Map and ## Soils Map. 1'he property o$/net ptovided tile maps of thc parccl unclcr invcstigation (lìxhibit I). 't'hc hand clrawn tilc maps were transposed over a soils map and proposcd sul¡clivision plat to proviclc an approximation of where the tile is located in relationship to thc landsca¡rc. ## A comparative study was conducted ## by Mr. Ilovee, of ## Flilgcrs' tile map, thc proposccl plat map arrd thc soils map of the site. The tile map provided ## by Mr. Hilgers was sketched over thc proposcd plat mâp to approximatc rvhcre thc tile was located. ## Hilger's úe/plat map was then compared to thc soils map of the sitc. Iìrom this ## comparison, Mr. Bovee formed the opinion that tilc has bcen installed within the hydric soil mapping units of the plat and accomplishes the following: ## Eliminates surface ponding; ## Lowen the saturation zone within the soils in those concave ¿re¿s of the plat; and thcreforc, ## The hydrology necessary to suppot a jurisdictional wetland is not present. ## Further, the tile appears to be primariþ located in those concave areas that would most likely be wetter in a normal rainfall year. It was noted that on Sept. 14, 2012 dunnga fi.led visit that there was no evidence of crop sftess in the soybeans - and this was after avery wet spring and early summer this year. ## On-site Findinss ## Landscape Setting. ## The Hilgers ptopeffy is located in a rural arca ¡hat mainly cropland and shoreland. Soybeans were planted and harvestedlur2012. ## The site has been extensively tiled with agricultural field tile to lower the water t¿ble where needed. Two field tile oudets go under the road and empty into the l¿ke. A residential dwelling, adjacent to the lake, is located on the north side of CSAH 26. Agricultural fields are on the nofih, east and west sides of the site. Eagle Lakc on the south sidc. ## Ovcrall, the terrain is gently tolling and appears to be well drained in the lower elevation areas. Along the lake and between CSAH 26, the embankment is steep, except for a small narrow area that is a fishing spot. Most of the surnmer, anglers can be seen fishing from the shore. A series of ice ramparts, about 2 to 3 feet wide, (about 10 feet wide total), are between the water and the embankment. ## On-site Investigation. ## M¡. Bovee's on-site investþtion included the following:,1preliminary survey indicating the proposed lot lines and topogtaphic data were used to establish four sites fo¡ further investigation. These sites are shown in Fþures 2 e.3. Once on site, the terain was examined for areas within the till uplands that are plane to concave-shaped that may be conducive to cteating hydrologic conditions that can creâte hyddc soils and support hydrophytic vegetation. ## Four sites were selected. A ## Wedand ## Determination Data Form, Midwest ## Region, was completed at each site @xhibit ## G). Each sire was marked with a red-tipped wooden lathe. 4 ## Results of the On-site ## Investigation ## Site 1. Vegetation. Site 1 is within a cultivated field used for row crops. Currcntly, thcre is soybcan stubblc on thc sutface but no gowing vegetation is present. 'l'hc cntirc ârea surrouncling Sitc 1 is managcd for agdculture with the usage of herbicides. 'fherc arc no hydrophytic vegetation indicators at this sitc. Soils. ## The soil observed at this site is consistent with thc Lura soils (211) mapped in thc lllue l,larth ## Soil ## Suwey and has a thick, datk-colored surfacc horizon with grayish subsoil colors.'I'hc soil is poorly to very poody d¡ained meaning undet normal conditions, precipitation would tcnd to pond at the surface and move very slowly downward through the soil profile. ## Rcdoximorphic features become evident 35+" below the surface.'fhe soil meets hydric soil indicat<>r 11,12. Hydrology. ## The site is near the middle of a concave-shaped swale at the base of surrounding steep slopes. This site receives surface water runoff from the surrounding slopes in addition to that precipitation that fall ditectly on the site. A surface tile inlet is present near this site which receives surface water runoff and routes the watet to a buried tile line which then outlets near a culvert which routes water to the east undet ## County Road 26. The property owner has stated the area is tled extensively @,xhibit ## B). It is this observer's opinion that the tile is functioning adequately provided the amount of spdng r:tnfall in this area. ## Consequently, there are no wetland hy&ologic indicators evident at this site. ## Site 2 Vegetation. Site 2 is within a cultivated field used for row crops. Currently, there is soybean stubble on the surface but no growing vegetation is present. The entire area surrounrting Site 2 is managed for agricultute with the usage of heòicides. There are no hy&ophytic vegetâtion indicators at this site. Soils. ## The soil observed at this site is outside the range of properties of the Cordova soils (109) mapped in the Blue ## Earth Soil Survey. The soil observed at this site has an over-thickened dark-colored sutface horizon extending to at least 44 inches below the sutface. No redoximoqphic features were ## Present' ## The soil on this site is modetately well to well drained, which is consistent with being in an uPPer footslope landscape position adjacent to steeper slopes. The soil observed at this site does not meet any hydric soil criteria or indic¿tors. Hydrology. ## The site is neat the middle of a slightly concave to plane-shaped drainway on the sideslope of surrounding steeper slopes. This site receives surface water runoff from the surrounding slopes in addition to that precipitation that fall directly <¡n thc sitc. 'l'hc propcrty owncr has statccl thc arca is tiled extensively which outlets near a culvcrt which r()utcs wâtcr. to thc s<¡uth unclcr ## Oounty lìoad 26. It is this observer's opinion that the tile is ftrnctioning adcquatcly considcring thc amount of spring l.atnfa[, to date in this area. ## Therc ârc no wctlancl hydrologic inclicators cvidcnt at this site- ## Site 3 Vegetation. Site 3 is within a cultivated field used for row crops. Currcntly, thcrc is soybcan stubblc on thc surface but no growing vegetation is present. 'I'he entirc area surrounding Site 3 is managecl for agricultue with the usage of herbicides. The wetland criteria requircd to mcct a prcvalcncc of hydrophytic vegetation is not met on Site 3. Soils. ## The soil observed at this site is outside the rangc of propcties of the Lcrdal soils (13882) or ## Kilkenny soils (2388) mapped ## in the Blue Earth Soil ## Survey and has ân over-thickcned dark- colored sutface horÞon extending to at least 45 inches bclow the surface. No rcdoximorphic features were present. The soil is well drained which is consistent with being in an uppcr f<rotslope landscape position adjacent to steeper slopes. The soil does not meet any hydric soil criteria ot indicators. ## Hydrology ## The site is near the middle of a slþhtly concâve to plane-shaped drainway on the sideslope of surounding steeper slopes. This site receives surface water runoff from the sur¡ounding slopes in addition to that precipitation that fall directly on the site. The property or,¡/ner has stated the area is tiled extensively which outlets rreùt ^ culvert which routes u/ater to the south under ## County ## Road 26. It is this observer's opinion that the tile is functioning adequately considedng the amount of spring rainfall to date in this area. ## There are no wetland hydtologic indicators evident at this site. Site 4 Yegetation. Site 4 is within a cultivated field used for row crops. Currently, there is soybean stubble on the surface but no gtowing vegetation is present. The entire area srurounding Site 4 is managed for agricultwe with the usâge of herbicides. There are no hy&ophytic vegetation indicators at this site. Soils. The soil observed at this site is consistent with the range of properties of the Cordova soils (109) mapped in the Blue ## Earth Soil Survey. ## The soil observed at this site has a slightly over-thickened dark-coloted surface horizon with a ## S"Fsh, motded subsoil with redoximoqphic features present. The soil on this site is poorþ drained, which is consistent with the flat landscape at this site. ## The soil observed at this site does meet hydric soil indicator Al2. Hydrology. ## The site is near the within a broad flat area on â sumnrit. Slopc shapc is slightly c()ncâvc to planc- shaped. This site rcceives direct precipitation and likcly a vcry small amount of surfacc wÍrtcr run<>ff from the immediately adjaccnt low gradient sidcslopcs. 'l'hc propcrty owncr has statcd thc arca is tiled extensively which routes tile water through thc Sitc 2 arca and hcncc to a culvcrt which routcs water to the south under County lload 26. Âlso, ncw r<¡ad c<xrstruction acljaccnt to thc n<>rth of this site likely intercepts any cxccssive subsoil water that cxisting tilc may nor collcct immcdiatcly. 'l'he newly constructed road ditches ## Íoute both surfacc ancl subsurfacc watcr castward d<>rvn thc ncrv r{ght of way. It is this observer's opinion that thc tilc and thc ncw road ditchcs arc functioning adequately to lower the w¿ter table in this arca considcring thc amount of spring rainfall to clatc in this atea. ## There are no wetland hydrologic indicators evidcnt at this site. ## Opinions ^'fhe following opinions are based upon the findings contained in this report: 1. That the dominant vegetation observed on thc sitc is upland vegctation and not hydrophytic vegetation. 2. That because of field tiling and the development of transportation cortidors, the hydrology has been alte¡ed and will no longer support a dominance of hy&ophytic vegetation. 3. That there âre no wetlands on this site as a result of the altered hy&ology. ## Conclusion ## A iudsdictional wetland must exhibit hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil and hydrologic indicators to be considered a wetland. ## Hydric soil indicators are present at ## Site 1 and Site 4 but there âre no wetland hydrophytic vegetâtion nor wetland hydrology indicators present at ^îy of the four sites examined. Therefore, it is this obsetwer's opinion that no wetlands are present on this development site. ## Iurisdictional ## Contact ## Blue Earth ## County is responsible fot administering the !Øetland Conservation Act in the counry. ## Stacey ## Feser and rim ## Grant, telephone 507-304-4387, arc the county contacts. ## Final ## Wetland Authodty The final wetland authority, regarding the presence or absences of wetlands on this property is under the jurisdiction of Blue ## Earth ## County and is subiect to verification by the county. ## Literatrre ## Reviewed ## Blue ## Earth ## County Wet,{rea ## Delineation as Indicators for Potential ìfetland ## Restoration Sites, 1998. ## Blue ## Earth ## County Protected ## Waters & Wetlands, Revised 199ó. ## Classification of '!íetlands and Deepwater ## Habitats of thc United States Cowardin, ct al., 1979. ## Grasses: ## Identification ## Guide ## Lauren ## Brown, Houghton Mifflin Company 1979. ## Federal ## Manual for ldenti8¡ing and Delineating ## Jurisdiction¿l \X/etlands ## U.S. ## Army Corps of ## Engineets, 7987, a¡d ## Mdwest ## Regional Supplement. 2008. National !üetland ## Inventory ## Maps, ## U. S. ## Fish and \ùíildlife Service. ## NRCS !7eb ## Soil Survey of Blue ## Earth ## County, Minnesota ## U.S. ## Department of .{gricultue,2012. Surface !üater ## Hydrolog Atlas. ## Blue Earth ## County, llarer Resources ## Center, M. s. ## U. 1993 ## USDA Aerial ## Crop Photogtaphs, 1979 - 1995 !Øetland ## Plants and Plant ## Communities of Minnesota and llisconsin ## U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1987 !üetlands of the ## United ## States ## U.S. Fish and ìùTildlife ## Service Circular 39 l7etland ## Delineation ## Ptecipitation ## D¿ta ## Retrieval from a Gridded Database: ## Minnesota Climatology llorking Group ## University of Minnesota, 201 2 19 ## I ## I .2 ## Rst¿' ## NESOTA ## IVER ## REFUGE ## I t- ¡ -\--- l' ## I ## I ## L ## G,tt 19 ## Loqzl :306 " 29", wildlif, ## Arei ## Irigure I ## Hilger Development Site Location ## Elevation contours - ## Hilgers property - ## Sec 36 Lime ## Township rn Parcel ## Elevation ## Contour P\,- index (10 ## Ft) inÞmediaÞ (2 ft) ## Contours - ## MN LiDAR 2012 ## Figure 2 ## Topographic ## Data - ## Hilger ## Development ## Site ## Investigation ## Sites ## North ## Figure 3 ## Hilger ## Data ## Collection ## Sites ## U.S. ## Fish and ## Wildlife ## Service a ## Hilgers ## NWI ## Map Jun ll, 2013 ## Wetlands ## I ## I ## I ## I ## I ## I ## I ## I ## Fresìwater ## Emêrgent ## Freshwster ## Forested/Shrub ## Egtuafine and Merine ## Deepwater ## Esluarine and ## Marine ## Freshwaler ## Pond ## Lske ## Riverin¿ ## Olher lh¡' mp b lq gcnaÞl roleme oDly. lhq US ## Fbh ad Urlldllo Srdko ¡¡ not elpoi3¡bb lor tho æcurcy or qæntnca3 ot ùe bæc dat¿ 3ùom 6 thb dt. ## All {stLnds Fl¡d dal. should be ur.d in æ@d¡ne wilh lhq l¡ycr æd& tound on lùe UHa¡d3 il.9F reb 3¡Þ. ## User ## Remarks: ## Exhibit A ## Custom ## Soil ## Resource ## Reoort ## SoilMap (Hilgers ## Soils Mäp) i- ## N i [¿ ol - ## Map Scde: l:5,210 if prinH on A s¡ze (8.5'x I 1') sheet 0 50 100 200 300 ¡se1 1.000 r _500 ## Soil Map-Blue Earth County, ## Minnesota ## Map ## Unit ## Legend ## Elue Earth County, Mlnne¡ota (MN0f 3) ## Map ## Unit Symbol ## Map Unlt NameAcres ln ## AOI Percent of ## AOI 948 109 Igll::1:_2 !: 6_ 1,_ï!9n! slopes c9_'99I" gl"vlo"t_ Lerdal silg clay loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded 4.2 9.5 4.3 5.4 't2.6 0.0 12.4 !,1o/o 18.4o/o 8.3olo 10.s"/, 24.4o/o ## O.l"t" 24.1o/o 13882 211 Lura silty l"V Kilkenny clay loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes 2388 ## 238C 239 ## Kilkenny clay loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes Le Sueur clay loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes ## W ## Water 3.2 6.2Yo Totals for Area of lnterest 51.5 100.0olo ## LISDA - ## Web Soil Survey ## National Cooperative Soil Survey ## Natural Resources ## Conservation ## Service 11t12t2012 Page 3 of 3 r.¡ttFÒl .ttñlll t a a l¡år n ## Vl ## It ## Itr tl 1' ''t 0rllll l^t -i *. l' o*{ t\*i -i ## J 1 t .b ü int ' fot t{ ll fml i.' t-â¡(I rF ]ll ll " ## Exhibit A ## MnDNR Protccted 'Watcrs and ## Wetlantls - ## BIue Earth ## County ## Eagle ## Lake - ## 60P ## Minnesota ## Climatology rVorking ## Grotrp: Starc (lli¡nar<¡lo.gv ()l'ficc l)Nlì [)ivisi<¡rr r¡t'l,]col<¡eical tnrl \\/irtcr l{cs<>t¡rccs [J<¡fi\l ## Vetland ## Delineation ## Precipitation ## Data Retrieval from a Gridded ## Database: ## Section 36, ## T109N' ## R26W 1981 -201 0 Summary ## Statistics multi-month totals: IIARM: gorving scason (lr'fay thru Scp) ANN: calcnrlnr ycar (f an thru l)cc) WÀT: rvrrtcr ycar (( )ct. ¡rrcvious ycar thru Sc¡r.) ## Precipitation totals are ¡n inches ## Jan ## Feb ## Mar ## AprMay ## JunJulAug sepOct ## Nov ## DecWARM ## ANNWAT 90%0.54 0.41 1.321.83 2.59 3.81 ## 2.6C ## 3.791.9C1.281.290.53 17.41 29.96 28.78 70%1.07 0.9c2.4C3.484.465.9€5.3€4.9C3.1€3.212.2i 1.38 21.31 ## 34.1 I32.98 nean0.840.7c1.9C 2.803.63 5.12 4.044.463.1 2.441.7t1 .1C 20.38 31.9431.80 ## Year-to-Year Data ## Year ## Jan ## Feb ## MarApr ## MavJunJulAugsepOct ## Nov ## Dec ## WARM ## ANNWAT 1995 0.150.0€2.742.76 3.1 1 3.93 b.JJ 3.63 4.014.62 0.7c0.8421.01 32.88 31.87 19941.0;0.45 0.323.692.0¿5.974.1t5.72 4.5c1 3.331.3€0.44 22.46 33.1431 .16 1993 0.8(0.6c1.2e 2.9S5.7e oo,l 7.229.13.1e0.42 1.8: 0.9235.20 44.0248.30 1992 0.710.741.72 2.2ç2.554.47 4.9i5.05 1.8:4.0c 2.3î 1.118.91 31.8830.34 1991 0.23 0.65 2.614.8e 6.5€ ?oc 5.2t 4.624.6t 1144.230.5425.09 39.3936.36 1990 0.0€0.453.72 4.01 4.4t ## 7.677.3C 4.1ê 1.6i 1.5€0.330.9ç 25.26 36.4335.65 1989 0.230.522.3e3.232.073.542.5C2.621.8¿ 0.28 1.510.31 12.57 21.0122.23 1988 1.37 0.24 1.14 2.841.51 0.77 1.174.352.340.41 2.540.37 10.1419.0520.13 1987 0.63 0.0c 1.12 0.272.2a2.675.574.211.7î0.7a 2.29 ## 1.3C16.43 22.8521.67 1986 0.72 0.45 1.85 4.402.7ê ## 9.4C 6.4€3.088.1[ 1.971.01 0.24 29.91 40.55 43.05 19850.5€0.313.653.4e 1.7e2.912.22 4.86 5.2î 3.12 1.47 1.116.98 30.6834.30 19840.6€0.9 t 1.63 3.1 2.8373e2.632.842.4t5.6€ 1.37 2.3118.14 33.8832.41 19830.530.8;2.73 2.7i4.32 5.02 2.804.622.643.1€ 3,56 1.1 19.40 34.1735.89 19821.6€ 0.4e1.211.3 5.831.982.54 4.9e 3.27 3.623.0c 2.9i 18.5932.8428.67 19810.2c 1.5( 0.822.2t 3.51 4.94 6.5! 7.911.623.1€ 1.350.9124.63 34.8531.28 19800.820.8: 0.931.1t2.31 3.140.32 6.4€3.3€ 1.210.'19 0.4t '15.58 21.1924.29 1979 1.6t 1.0f3.29 1.3t 2.53 4.49 3.11 7.5ç 1.6€2.721.920.3c 19.4031.72 30.34 ## Exhibit ## Wetland ## Delineation ## Precipitation Data ## D ## Retrieval from a Gtidded ## Database ## WETLAND MAPPING ## Proiect ## Name: Replat ## of Hiþers' Subdivision Date: ## Investigator: Bovee/I{anna ## Location: Lime Township, NE ## %, NW 7/4 ,Govt. ## COIWENTIONS ## REVIESI ## RECORD ## Exhibit E 10 / 12/ 12 Owner/Client: ## Jim l-lilgcrs ## Lot 2, ## Scction 3(r,'l'109N, lì2óW ## YEARClimate ## ConditionSymbols: CS-Crop ## Stress, ## MS-Mnor Stress, ## DO-Drowned Out, ## NC-Not Cropped, S$fl-Standins Water. ## WS-!íetland Sisnarure, ## AP-Âltered ## Pattern, ## NV-Normal ## Vegetative Cover $lctlDrylNolrnal & Grorving ## Scason ## Ilainfall OverallSite 1Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 ## Cornrncnt 7979w-19.40 ## NVNVNVNVNV Vcry pale blue ## Slicle 1980D-1s.s8 ## NV ## NVNVNVNV 1981ul-24.63 ## NVNVNVNVNV 7982 ## N-18.59 ## NVNVNV ## NVNV ## 7983N-19.40 ## NVNVNVNV ## NV ## 1.984N-18.14 ## NVMSMSMS ## MSVery faint ## 1985N-16.98 ## WSWSWSWS ## WSxx 1986u/-29.97WSWSNVMSNV 1987 ## N-16.43 ## NVNVMS ## NV ## MS ## 1988D-10.14 ## CSCSCSCSCS ## Very dry 1989D-12.s',| ## CSWS ## WS ## NVMS 1.990 ul-25.26 ## WSWSNVNVNV 1,991w-2s.09NVNVNVNVNV 1992 ## N-L8.91 ## MSMSMSMSMS ## Dark 1993 \ù7-35.20 ## SWs!øNVWSWS 1.994 'u/-22.46 ## CSWSMSMS ## MS 1.995 w-21.01 ## NV ## NV ## NV ## NVNV ## Summary NormalYearc ## # Normal Yearsx 6 # Normal ## Years with wet sionatures 1 ## 7o Normal Years with wet sisnatures 16.6% ## Summarv ## Wêt:Yea¡s .. # rù7et ## Years* ## I # ## Ìùlet ## Years with Normal sisnatutes 4 ## %o Wet Years with Normal sisriatures 50% ## N / .l'-t o¡4,*oN 15 ## I t\ ## I 2& r3 . i."l ..:;Èi?.\{i ri,''l$i ## Ë)i!¡t¿ì!*i lQ?íl tLç t ,, + ## /F, n /n,,, (n,',,, -r' - ## Exhibit C - ## Hilger Site 1. ## WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - ## Midwest ## Region ## ProjecUSite Hilger ## DovelopmentCity/County: Mankato-Blue ## Earth Sampling ## Dato: ## May 12,2013 ## ApplicanUOwner: Hilger ## State: ## Minnesota ## Sanrpling Point: 1 ## lnvesligato(s): Terry BoveeSection, Township, Range: ## Sec ## 36, T109N, ## R2ôW ## Lanclform (hillslope, torrace, etc.):toeslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concav€ ## Slope (%): 0 to 1 ## Lat: ## Soil Map Unit ## Nanle Lura (21 1) Are climatic/hyclrologic conditions of the site typical for lhis time of the year? ## Y (lf no, explain in remarks) Are vegelation ## X , soil , or hydrology X signif¡cantly disturbed? ## Are ,,normal circumstancos" Are vegetation ## X , soil , or hydrology ## X naturally problematic? present? ## N0 ## SUMMARY ## OF FINDINGS (lf needed, explain any answeÍs in remarks.) ## Long; ## Datum: \Wl Classification: ## Hydrophytic vegetation present? ## N Hydric soil presenl? ls the sampled area wlthln a wetlanr ## N ## Wetland hydrology present? ## N f yes, optional welland site lD: ## Remarks: (Explain alternalive proceduros hore or in a separate report.) Site 1 is within a cult¡vated field nranaged for row crops. A surface tile intake is present in this srnall swale. ## Soybean stubble still present, but other parts of field are being prepared for corn planting. vEGETATION -- Use scientific nâmes of olants. Tree Stratum. (Plot size: 1 2 3 4 5 Sapling/Shrub stratun (Plot size: 1 2 3 4 5 Herb stratum (Plot size: 1 ## Absolule Dominan lndicator ) % ## Cover t Species Staus 0 =Total ## Cover 0 =Total ## Cover ## Domlnancs ## Test ## Worksheet ## Number of Domlnant ## Specles that ## are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 ## Total Numl¡er of Dominant ## Spacies Across all ## Strata: 0 Percent of ## Dominânt Species that are ## OBL, FACW. or FAC: 0.00% (ArB) ## (A) ## (B) ## Prevalenco lndex ## Worksheot ## Tolal o/o Cover of: OBL species ## __L* 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x2 = 0 ## FAGspecies _ 0 *3= 0 ## FACUspecies 0 x4= 0 ## UPLspecies 0 x5= 0 column totals 0 ## (A) 0 (8) ## Prevalence lndex = ## B/A = ## Woody vine slratum (Plot size; 1 0 =Total ## Cover 3 4 5 6 7 ## I ## I 10 ## Hytlrophytic ## Vegetatlon lncllcators: _ Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation Dominance test is >50o/o - ## Prevalence index is s3.0' ## Morphogical aclaptations' (provide support¡ng data in Remarks or on a _separate sheet) ## Problematic hydrophytic vegetation' _ (oxplain) 'lndicators of hydric soil and v/etland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed ol problematic 0 = ## Total Cover 2 ## Hydropnyuc vegetation ¡rresent? ## N ## Renlarks; (lncludo photo numbors here or on a separate sheet) Site 1 area is managed for row crops, therefore, with herbicide useage no other vegetation present other than the intended crop. At time of field visit, no crops had been planted but preparation for seed¡ng was underuay. ## US ## Amy Corps of ## Engineers ## Midwest ## Region ## Proflle ## Descriptionl (Descrll¡e to the depth needecl to clocunrent ths hlcllcator or corrllnlt the absence of lndlcatore,) ## Depth (lnches) ## Matr¡x ## Color (moist) % ## Redox ## Fealures ## Color (moist) % ## Type' Loc" ## Texture ## Renrarks 0-9 rcYR2N100 loam slope wash deposits ## 9-35N2/0100 silty clay original sulaco 35-44 ## 5Y3/1 955Y4t2 5 ## D ## M silty clay 44+5Y4t1 95 5Y5t4 5 c ## M silty clay loam 'Type: ## C= Concenlration, D=Depletion, ## RM = ## Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. '^Location: ## PL= ## Pore Lining, ## M =Matrix ## Sandy ## Gleyed Malrix ## (S4) ## Sandy Redox ## (S5) ## Stripped ## Matrix ## (S6) ## Loamy ## Mucky ## Mineral ## (F1) ## Loamy Gleyed ## Matrix ## (F2) ## Depleted Matrix ## (F3) ## Redox Dark Surface ## (F6) ## Depleted Dark Surface ## (F7) ## Redox ## Depressions ## (F8) lndlcators for Prol¡le¡natlc ## Hydrlc Solls: ## Coast Prairie ## Redox ## (A16) (LRR ## K, ## L, R) - ## Dark Surface ## (S7) ## (LRR ## K, ## L) -5 cm Mucky Peat or ## Peat ## (S3) (LRR ## K, ## L, R) -lron-Manganese ## Masses ## (F12) ## (LRR ## K, ## L, R) ]_Vury ## Shallow ## Dark Surface ## (TF12) _Other (explain in remarks) 'lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, ttnloss disturbed or problemalic ## Hyclrlc ## Soll lncllcators: _Histisol(41) _ ## Histic Epipedon (42) _ ## Black ## Histic (43) _ l-lydrogen Sulfide (44) _ ## Stratilìecl Layers (45) _2 cm Muck (410) _ ## Depleted ## Below ## Dark Surface (41 1) ## X ## Thick Dark ## Surface (412) -Sandy ## Mucky Mineral ## (S1) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat ## (S3) ## Kestncilve ## Layer (11 oDserved): ## Type: ## Depttr (i Hydrlc soll presont? ## Remarks: Cumulic epiaquoll, consistent with mapping unit. ## Th¡s site is located within a concave swale surrounded by steeper slopes and a roadway. Recent heavy rains have likely contributed to overwash deposits. ## Exhibít C - ## Hilger Site 1. sotL ## Santpllng ## Polnt: ## I ## HYDROLOGY ## Wetland Hydrology lndlcators: Primarv lndicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aoplv) ## Surface ## Water (41) ## High Water Table ## (A2) ## Saturation (43) ## Water ## Marks (Bl) ## Sediment ## Depos¡ts (82) ## Drift Deposits (83) ## Algal Mat or Crust (84) lron Deposits (85) lnundation Visible on Aerial lmagery (87) ## Sparsely Vegetated Concave ## Surface (88) ## Wator-Sta¡ned ## Leaves (89) ## Secondarv lndicators (minimum of two requiredl ## Aquatic Fauna (813) Surface ## Soil Cracks (86) ## True Aquatic Plants (814) - ## Drainage ## Patterns (810) ## Hydrogen ## Sulfide Odor (Cl) - ## Dry-season ## Water Table ## (C2) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living ## Roots ## Crayfish Bu¡rows ## (CB) (Ca) -saturation ## Visible on Aerial lmagery (Cg) Presence of ## Reduced lron ## (C4) - Stunted or ## Stressed ## Planls ## (D1) ## Recent lron Reduction ## in Tillecl Soils ## Geomorphic ## Position ## (D2) ## (C6) - ## FAC-Neutral ## Test ## (D5) ## Thin Muck Surfaco ## (C7) Gauge or ## Well Data ## (D9) ## Other (Explain in ## Remarks) Flel(l uÞservaUonS: ## Surface water pres€nl? ## Water tablo present? ## Saturation present? (includes capillary fringe) ## NoX ## No ## No ## Yes ## Yes ## Yes -- ---r- ## Oeplh (inches): ## Depth (¡nches): ---?õ- ## Depth (inches): ## 3B ## N ## Wetlancl hyclrology present? ## Descr¡be recorded data (slrearn gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous ¡nspections), if available: ## Remarks: This site receives surface runoff from adjacent hills to west, but there is a surface tile inlet which drains surface water quickly to an outlet exiting at the east side of site via a culvert under the road. This swale has been tiled extens¡vely according to tile map prov¡ded by property owner. ## US Army Corps of Engineers ## Midwest ## Region ## Exhibit C - ## Hilger Site 2 ## WETLAND ## DETERMINATION ## DATA ## FORM - ## Mlclwest Reglon ## ProjecUSite ## Hilger Developrnont ## ApplicanUOwner: ## Hilger lnvestigato(s): ## Terry Bovee ## Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ## Slope (%): 3 to 4 Lat: ## Are vegetation X , soil , or hydrology X naturally problematic? ## SUMMARY ## OF ## FINDINGS ## SoilMap Unit ## NameCordova (109) \Wl Classification: ## Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of lhe site typical for lhis t¡me of tho year? ## Y (lf no, oxplain ¡n remarks) Are vegelation ## X , soil , or hydrology X signifìcantly disturbed? ## Are ,,normal circumstances,, ## City/County: ## Mankalo-Blue Earlh Sampling ## Dtl.' __ttlg!!s_ ## State: Minnesota Sampling ## Point: 2 ## 3ection, Township, Range: ## Sec ## 36, T109N, ## R26W footslofie Local relief (concave, convex, none): plane ## Long: ## Datum: present? ## No (lf needed, explain any answers in rentarks.) Hydrophytic vegetalion presenl? ## N ## Hydric soil present? ls tho sanrplerl area wlthln a wetlanr ## N ## Wetland hyclrology present? ## N ## I f yes, optional wetland site lD: ## Remarks: (Explain alternalive procedures here or in a separate report.) ## Site 2 is within a cultivated fielcl managed for rovr crops. Soybean stubble still present, bul other parts of field are being prepared for corn planling. is tiled according to tile nrap provided by property ov¿ner. Culvert under road at edge of f¡eld ls oullet for lile water, ## VEGETATION -- Use scient¡fic names of plants. ## Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1 2 3 4 5 ## SaolinglShrub stratun (Plot size: 1 ## Herb slralum (Plot size: 1 ## Absolule Dom¡nan lndicator ) % ## Cover t Species ## Staus 0 = ## Total ## Cover 0 = ## Tolal Cover 2 3 4 5 ## Domlnance ## Test Worksheet Number of ## Dominant ## Species that ## sre OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 ## Tolal Nuntber of ## Dontlnant ## Species ## Across all Strata: 0 Percent of ## Dominant Spec¡es thâl aro OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0.00% ## (A/B) ## (A) ## (B) ## Prevalence lntlex Worksheet ## Tolal o/o Cover of: ## OBLspecies ]|"1= 0 FACW species O x2= 0 ## FACspecies _ 0 "3= 0 FACU species ## A*4 = 0 ## UPLspec¡es ## It5= 0 column lotals 0 ## (A) 0 ## (B) ## Prevalence lndex = ## B/A = Woodv vine stratum (Plot size: 1 0 = ## Total Cover 3 4 5 6 7 ## I 9 10 ## Hydrophytlc Vegetatlon lndicators: _ RaRid test for hydrophytic vegetation Dominance test is >50% - ## Prevalence index is <3.0' Morphogical adaptatíons* (provide supporting data ín Remarks or on a _separate sheet) ## Problenlatic hydrophytic vegetation' _ (explain) 'lndicators of hydric scil and vretland hydrology nìust be present, unless d¡sturbed or problematic 0 =Tolal ## Cover 2 l-lydrophyt¡c vegetation preserrt? ## N ## Remarks: (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Site 2 area is managecl for row crops, therefore, with herbicide usage no other vegetation present than the intended crop. At time of field visit, no crops had been planted but preparation for seed¡ng was underuay. ## US Amy Corps of Engineers ## Midwest ## Region ## SOIL ## Exhibit ## C - ## Hilger Site 2 ## Sampllng ## Polrrt: 2 ## Proflle ## Descrlption: (Describe to the depth neederl to docr¡ment the lndlcator or confirnr the absence of lncllcators.) ## Deplh (lnches) ## Matrix ## Color (moist) % ## Keoox ## Fealures ## Color (moist) o/o ## Tvoe' Loc" ## Texturo ## Remarks 0-s 10YR2t2 100loam 9-37 10YR2/1100loam 37-4410YR2t2 100loam 'Type: ## C=Concenlrat¡on, ## D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS=MaskedSandGrains. "Location: ## PL= Pore ## Lining, M = ## Matrix _Sandy ## Gleyed ## Matrix ## (S4) _Sandy ## Redox(S5) _ ## Stripped ## Matrix ## (S6) _ ## Loamy ## Mucky Mineral (Fl) _ ## Loarny Gleyed ## Matrix ## (F2) _ ## Depleted Matrix ## (F3) _ ## Redox Dark ## Surface ## (F6) _ ## Depleted Dark ## Surface ## (F7) ## Redox Depressions ## (FB) lntllcators for Prol¡lematlc l"lydrlc ## Solls: ## Coast ## Prairie Redox ## (A16) ## (LRR ## K, L, R) - ## Dark Surface ## (S7) (LRR ## K, L) -5 cm ## Mucky Peat or ## Peat ## (S3) ## (LRR ## K, L, ## R) - lron-Manganese ## Masses ## (F12) (LRR ## K, L, R) -Very ## Shallow ## Dark Sulace ## (TF12) -Olher (explain in remarks) 'lndicators of hydrophytic vegetalion and weltand hyclrology must be present, unless disturbed or problentatic ## Hy<lrlc Soll lndlcators: _Histisol(41) _ ## Histic Epipedon (42) _Black ## Histic ## (A3) _ ## Hydrogen ## Sulfide ## (A4) _ ## Stratified Layers (45) _ 2 cm ## Muck (410) _ ## Depleted Below ## Dark Surface ## (A1 'l) ## Thick Dark ## Surface (412) -sancly ## Mucky ## Mineral ## (S1) _5 cnr Mucky ## Peat or Peat ## (S3) ## Kosrncïvo ## Layor (lÌ oDsetÏodr: Hydrlc soll present? ## N ## Remafks: ## Well drained Cumulic hapludoll, not consistent with mapping unit. This site is located within a plane slope in a footslope position that is surrounded by steeper slopes and a roadway. ## HYDROLOGY ## Wetland Hydrology lndicatore : ## Primary lndicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apBly) ## Surface Water ## (A1) ## High Water Table (42) ## Saturation (43) ## Water ## Marks (81) ## Sediment Deposits (82) ## Drift Oeposits (83) ## Algal ## Mat or Grust (84) lron Deposils (85) lnundation Visible on Aerial lmagery (87) ## Sparsely Vogetated ## Concave Surface ## (BB) ## Water-Slained Leaves (89) ## Aquatic Fauna (813) ## True Aquatic Plants (814) ## Hydrogen ## Sulfide ## Odor ## (C1) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on ## Living ## Roots (ca) Presence of Reduced lron ## (C4) ## Recent lron Re<luction ## in Tilled Soils (c6) ## Thin Muck Surface ## (C7) ## Gauge or Well Data ## (D9) ## Olher (Ëxplain ln ## Remarks) Secondarv lndicalors (minimum of two reot¡ired' ## Surface ## Soil Cracks ## (BO) - ## Drainage ## Patterns (Bl0) - ## Dry-season ## Water Table ## (C2) -Crayfish ## Burrows ## (C8) -saturat¡on ## Visible on Aerial lmagery ## (C9) - ## Stunted or Stressed ## Plants (Dl) - ## Geontorplì¡c Position ## (D2) - ## FAC-Neutral ## Test ## (D5) ## X Depth (inches): ---X-Oepttr (inches): --T-Oeptfr (inches): ## Flel(l Ol)sorvatlons: Surface water present? Water table present? ## Saturalion present? (includes capillary frinqe) ## Yes ## Yes ## Yes ## No ## No ## No ## Wetlancl hydrology present? ## N )escribe recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ## KenlafKs: This site recieves surface runoff from adjacent hills to north that flows southward to edge of field where surface water drains to a culvert under the road to the south. ln addition to runnoff leaving site due to slopes, this minor drainway- sideslope area has been tiled accorcling to tile map provided by property owner. ## US Arrny Corps of Engineers ## Midwest ## Region ## Exhibit C - ## Hilger Site 3 ## WETLAND ## DETERMINATION DATA FORM - ## Mldwest ## Reglon ## ProjecUSite ## Hilger Developnrent ## City/County: Mankato-Blue ## Earlh Sampling ## Dutu,_Mny 12, ffi_ ## Slate: Minnesota Sampling ## Point: 3 ## Seclion, ## Township, Range: Sec 36, ## T109N, R26W footslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): plano ## Long:Dalum: ## ApplicanUOwner: ## Hilger lnvestigator(s): ## Terry Bovee ## Landfornr (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ## Slope (%); 3 to 4 ## Lal: ## Soil Map Unit Name Lerdal 13882 and ## Kilkenny (2388) tlWl ## Classification: Are clinìatic/hydrologic cond¡tions of the site typical for this time of the year? ## Y (lf no, explain in remarks) Are vegetalion ## X , soil , or hydrology X signifìcanlly disturbed? Are,'nornlal circumstances,, Are vegetation ## X , soil , or hydrology X naturally problenratic? ## SUMMARY OF FINDINGS present? ## No (lf needed, explain any answers in remarks.) ## VEGETATION.- ## Use ## Hydrophytic vegetalion presenl? ## N ## Hydric soil presenl? ls tho samplod aroa wlthin a wetlanr N Welland hydrology present? ## Nf yos, optional wotland site lD: ## Remarks: (Explain alternalive procedures here or in a separate report.) ## Site 3 is within a cultivated field managed for row crops. Soybean stut¡ble still present, but other parts of field are being prepared for corn planting. is tiled according to tile map provitled by property owner. Culvert under road at edge of field is outlet for tile waler. scientific names of 2 3 4 5 ## Tree ## Slratum (Plot size: 1 ## Absolute Dom¡nan lndicator ) % ## Cover t ## Species Staus Sapling/Shrub stratun (Ptot size: 1 0 =Tolal ## Cover 0 =Total ## Cover 2 3 4 5 ## Herb slralum (Plot size: 1 ## Dornlnance ## Test Workeheet Nunìber of ## Dominanl ## Spec¡es that ## are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 ## Total Number of ## Domínant ## Species Across all Strala: 0 Percent of ## Dominant Specles that ## are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0.00% (tuB) ## (A) ## (B) Prevalence lndex ## Worksheet ## Total % Cover of: ## OBLspecies ## At 1 = ## FACWspecies ## L*2= ## FACspecies ax3= ## FACU species ## _I* 4 = ## UPLspecies _ 0 x5= Column totals 0 ## (A) Prevalence lndex = ## B/A = 0 o o 0 o --ìõ- rel 3 ¿l 5 6 7 ## I ## I 10 0 =Total ## Cover ## Woody vine stratum (Plot size: 1 ## Hyclrophytic Vegetatlon lndicators: _ ## RaRid test for hydrophytic vegetation Dominance test is >50% - ## Prevalence index is 53.0* Morphogical adaptations' (provide supporling data in Remarks or on a _separate sheet) ## Problemalic hydrophytic vegetation* _ (explain) 'lodicåtors of hydric soil and wetland hydrology musl be present, unless d¡sturbed or problenìatic 2 ## Hydropnyuc vegetation present? ## N ## Renlarks: (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Site 3 area is managed for row crops, therefore, with herbicide usage no other vegetation present other than the intended crop. ## At time of field visit, no crops had been planted but preparation for seeding was underuay, ## US Amy Corps of ## Engineers ## Midwest ## Region ## Exhibit C - ## Hilger ## Site 3 ## WETLAND ## DETERMINATION DATA FORM - ## Mlclwest ## Reglon ## ProjecVSite Hilger Developnrent ## City/County: Mankato-Bluo ## Earth Sampllng ## Date: May 12,2013 ## ApplicanUOwner: ## Hilger ## State: Minnesota ## Sampling ## Point: 3 ## lnvesligato(s): Terry Bovee ## Section, ## Township, Range: ## Sec 36, ## T109N, ## R26W ## Landform (hillslope, torrace, etc.):footslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): plane ## Slope (%): 3 to 4 Lat: ## Long: ## Dalum: ## Soil Map Unit ## Nanre Lerdal 13882 ## and Kl Wl Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? ## Y (lf no, explain in remarks) Are vegetation ## X , soil , or hydrology ## X significanlly disturbed? ## Are ,,nornlal circumstances,' Are vegetalion ## X , soil , or hydrology X naturally problenratic? ## SUMMARY OF FINDINGS present? ## No (lf needed, explain any answers in remarks.) Hydrophytic vegetation present? ## N Hydric soil presenl? ls tho sanrplod area wlthin a wetlanr ## N ## Welland hydrology present? ## Nf yos, optional wotland site lD: ## Remarks: (Explain alternalive procedures here or in a separate report.) ## Site 3 is within a cultivated fìeld managed for rovr crops. Soybean stubble slill prssenl, but other parts of field are being ptepared for corn planting. is tiled according to lile map provided by property owner. Culvert under road at edge of field is outlet for tile water. ## VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. ## Treo ## Stratum (Plot size: ## I Sapling/Shrub stratun (Plot size: 1 2 3 4 5 ## Herb stratum (Plot size: 1 ## Absolute Dominan lndicator ) o/o ## Cover t ## Species Staus 2 3 4 5 0 =Total ## Cover 0 = ## Total Cover ## Domlnance ## Test Worksheet ## Nunrber of ## Dominanl ## Species that are OBL, FACW, or ## FAC: 0 ## Total Number of ## Domlnant ## Species Across all ## Strata: 0 ## Percent of ## Domlnant Species that are OBL, FACW, or ## FAC: 0.00% ## (A) ## (B) ## (A/B) ## Prevalerrce lnclex Worksheet lolal o/o ## Cover of ## OBLspecies ## I" 1 = ## FACW species 0 x2 = ## FAC species ## __L* 3 = ## FACU species _lx4 = ## UPLspecies _1"5= column totals 0 ## (A) ## Prevalence lndex = ## B/A = 0 o o 0- -0- --õ-tel ## Woodv vine stratum (Plot size: 1 3 4 5 6 7 ## I 9 10 0 =Total ## Cover ## Hyclrophytlc ## Vegetation lndlcators: _ ## RaRid test for hydrophytic vegetation Dominance test is >50olo - ## Prevalence index is g3.0' Morphogical adaptations' (provide supporling data in Remarks or on a _separate sheet) ## Problematic hydrophytic vegetation* _ (exPlain) 'lndicâtors of hydric soil and \vetland hydrology must be present, unless dislurbed or problemat¡c 0 =Total ## Cover 2 l-lydrophyuc vegetatlon ¡rresent? ## N ## Remarks; (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Site 3 area is managed for row crops, therefore, with herbícide usage no other vegetation present other than the intended crop. At time of field visit, no crops had been planted but preparation for seeding was underuay. ## US Amy ## Corps of Engineers ## Midwest ## Region ## SOIL ## Exhibit ## C - ## Hilger Site 3 ## Sampllng Polnt: 3 ## Profile Descriptlon; (Describe to the tlepth neede<l to cloct¡mont tho lntllcator or conflrnr tho absonce of lncllcators.) ## Depth (lnches) ## MAtflX ## Color (moist) o/o Kedox heatufes ## Color lnloist) % Tvoe' Loc" ## Texlure ## Remarks 0-9 10YR2t2 100loanr ## 9-3610YR2/1 100 loam 36-4510YR2t2 100 loam ## 45-5210YR3/2 100loam ^Type: ## C=Concenlration, D= ## Depletion, ## RM= ## ReducedMatrix, MS=MaskedSandGrains. "Location: ## PL= PoreLining, ## M =Matrix _Sandy ## Gleyed Matrix ## (S4) _ ## Sancly ## Redox ## (S5) _Strippod ## Matrix (56) _Loamy ## Mucky Mineral ## (F1) _ ## Loanry ## Gleyed Makix ## (F2) ## Depleted ## Matrix ## (F3) -Redox ## Dark Surface ## (F6) _Depleted ## Dark ## Surfaco ## (F7) ## Redox ## Deprossions ## (F8) lndlcators lor Problematlc ## Hydrlc ## Solls: ## Coast ## Prairie Redox (416) ## (LRR ## K, L, R) - ## Dark Surface ## (S7) (LRR ## K, ## L) -5 cm Mucky Peat or ## Peal ## (S3) ## (LRR ## K, L, ## R) - lron-Manganese ## Masses ## (F12) (LRR ## K, L, R) -Very ## Shallow ## Dark ## Surface ## (TF12) _ ## Other (explain in remarks) 'lndicalors of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology nrust be present, unless disturbed or problematic ## Hydric Soll lndlcators¡ _ ## Hislisol (Al) _ ## Hislic Epipedon (42) ## Black Histic (43) - ## Hydrogen Sulficle (44) _ ## Slratifìed Layers ## (A5) _2 cm Muck ## (A10) _ ## Depleted Below Dark ## Surfacê (411) ## Thick Dark Surface (412) -Sandy ## Mucky Mineral (S'l) _5 ## cnr Mucky Peat or ## Peat ## (S3) ## Restrictlve Layor (lf olrserved): ## Type: ## Depth (inches): Hydrlc soll present? ## N ## KemafKs: Well drained Cumulic hapludoll, may be considered a contrasting inclusion within mapping unit. This site is located w¡thin on a plane slope in a footslope pos¡tion that is surrounded by steeper slopes and a roadway. ## HYDROLOGY ## Wetland Hydrology lndlcators : Primarv lndicators (minimum of one is required: check all lhat apply) ## Sr¡rface Water (41) ## High Water Table (42) ## Saluration (43) ## Water Marks (Bl) ## Sediment ## Deposits (82) ## Drift ## Deposits (83) ## Algal Mat or Crust (84) lron ## Deposits (85) lnundation ## Visible on Aerial lmagery (87) ## Sparsely ## Vegetatod ## Concave Surface ## (BB) ## Water-Slained ## Leaves (Bg) ## Aquatic ## Fauna (Bl3) ## Irue Aquatic Plants (814) ## Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Ci ) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (ca) Presence of Reduceci lron ## (C4) _ ## Stunted or ## Stressed Planls ## (D1) ## Recent hon Reduclion in Tilled ## Soils ## Geomorphic ## Position (02) ## (C6) - ## FA0-Neutral ## Test ## (D5) ## Thin ## Muck Surface ## (C7) ## Gauge orWelf Data ## (D9) ## Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Secondary lndicators (minimum of two requiredl ## Surface ## Soil Cracks (86) - ## Drainage Palterns ## (B1O) - ## Dry-season ## Water ## Table ## (C2) -Crayfish ## Burrows ## (C8) - ## Saturation ## Visible on Aerial lmagery ## (CO) ## X ## Depth (inches): ## Toeptn (inches): ## X Depth (inches): ## Ftetü (JDservalrotìsi Surface rvater present? Water table present? ## Saturation present? (includes capillary frinqe) ## Yes ## Yes ## Yes ## No ## No ## No ## Wetland hydrology present? ## N ## Descrilre recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ## RenìarKs: ## This site recieves surface runoff from adjacent hills to north that flows southward to edge of field where surface water drains to a culvert under the road to the south. ln addition to runnoff leaving this síte due to slopes, this minor drainway-sideslope area has been tiled according to tile map provided by property owner. ## US Army Corps of Engineers ## Midwest ## Region ## Exhibit C - ## Hilger Site 4 ## WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA ## FORM - ## Midwest ## Region ## ProjecUSite l-lilger Development ## City/County: Mankato-Bluo ## Earth Sarnpling ## Date: May 12, 2013 ## Slate: Minnesola ## Sampling ## Point: 4 ## Section, ## Township, Range: Sec ## 36, T109N, ## R26W summit Local relief (concave, convex, none): concavo to plano ## Long: ## Datum: ## ApplicanVOwner: Hilger lnvestigator(s): ## Terry Bovee ## Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ## Slope (%): 1 lo 2 ## Lat: ## Soil ## Map Unit NameCordova (109) tlWl ## Classifìcation ## Are climatic/hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? ## Y (lf no, explain in re marks) ## Are vegelation X , soil , or hydrology X signifìcanlly dislurbed? ## Arc ,,norrnal cifcuntslances,, Are vegetalion ## X , soil , or hydrology X naturally problematic? present? ## No ## SUMMARY ## OF FINDINGS (lf needed, explain any answers in remarks.) ## VEGETATION -- Use scient¡fic names of Hydrophytic vegetation present? ## N Hydric soil present? ls the sarnpled area wlthln a wetlanr ## N ## Wetland hydrology present? ## Nf yes, optional welland sile lD: : (Explain allernative procedures here or in a separate reporl.) 4 ¡s \'¿ithln a cullivated lield managed for ror'/ crops. Soybean stubble still present, but other parts of lield are be¡ng prepared for corn plant¡ng. ## Area ¡s til€d according map provided by property olyner. A ner¿ roãdv¿ay \.//associated deep road ditches is under conslruction adjacent to this site. namess. ## Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1 ## Absolute Dominan lndicator ) o/o ## Cover t Species Slaus 2 3 4 5 Sapling/Shrub stratur (Plot size; 1 0 =Tolal ## Cover 0 =Total ## Cover 2 3 4 5 l-lerb stralum (Plot size: 1 ## Donrlnance ## Test Worksheet ## Numt¡er of Dominant ## Species that are ## OBL, ## FACW, or ## FAC: O ## Total Number of ## Dominant ## Species Across all Strata: 0 Percent of ## Dominant Species that ars ## OBL, ## FACW, or FAC: 0.00% ## (A) ## (B) (tu8) ## Prevalence lrtdex ## Worksheet ## Tolal o/o ## Cover of: ## OBLspecies 0 x1= FACW species ## Q x2 = FACspecies 0 x3= FACU species __n _x 4 = ## UPLspecies 0 x5= ## Column totals 0 ## (A) Prevalence lndex = ## B/A = 0 o 0 o o --o-tal 3 4 5 o 7 ## B ## I 10 0 = ## Total Cover Woody vine stratum (Plol size: 1 ## Hydrophytlc Vegetatlon lncllcators: _ Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetatìon ## Dominance test is >50o/o Prevalence index is s3.0' ## Morphogical adaptations' (provicle supporting data in Remarks or on a _ separate sheet) ## Problemalic hydrophytic vegetation' _ (exPlain) 'lndicators of hydric soil and v/etland hydrology must be present, unless distrrrbed or problemalic 2 0 = ## Total Cover l.lyclrophytac vegetatlon present? ## N ## Remarks: (lnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Site 4 area is managed for row crops, therefore, with herbicide usage no other vegetation present other than the intended crop. ## At time of field visit, no crops had been planted but preparation for seeding was underway. ## US Anry ## Corps of ## Engineers ## Midwest Region ¡rofile ## Descrlptlotì: (Descrlbe to the dspth naeded to clocument the lndicator or conflrm the absence of ln<llcators.) ## Depth (lnches) ## Matrix ## Color (moist) o/o ## Redox ## Features ## Color (moist) % ## Tvpe' Loc"Texture ## Remarks 0-10 ## 10YR2/1 100 clay loam 10-18 ## 10YR3/1 100 clay loam 18-35 2.5Y5t2 952.sY5t4 5 cM clay loam 35-44 5Y5t2 952.5Y5t6 5cM clay loam 'Type:C=Concenlration, ## D=Depletioñ, ## RM=ReducedMatrix, ## MS= MaskedSand Grains. "Localion: ## PL=PoreLining, ## M= ## Matrix _Sandy ## Gleyed Matrix ## (S4) _Sandy ## Redox ## (S5) stripped Matrix (s6) - ## Loamy ## Mucky Minoral ## (F1) _ ## Loanry ## Gleyed ## Matr¡x ## (F2) _ ## Depleted ## Matrix ## (F3) _Redox ## Dark ## Surface ## (F6) _Depteted ## Dark Surface ## (F7) _ ## Redox Depressions ## (F8) ## Intllcators for Prolrlematlc ## Hy<lrlc Sollsl ## Coasl Prairie ## Redox (416) ## (LRR ## K, ## L, ## R) - ## Dark ## Surface ## (S7) (LRR ## K, ## L) -5 ## cm Mucky Peat or Peat ## (S3) (LRR ## K, ## L, ## R) -lron-Manganese ## Masses (Ff 2) ## (LRR ## K, ## L, ## R) -Vury ## Shallow ## Dark ## Surface ## (TF12) _Other (explain in remarks) 'lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic ## Hytlrlc Soll lndlcators: _Histisol(41) _ ## Histic Epipedon (A2) _ ## Black ## Histic (43) _ ## Hydrogen ## Sulfide ## (A4) _Stratified ## Layers ## (A5) _2 cm ## Muck (410) _ ## Depleted ## Below Dark ## Surface (41 1) ## X Thick ## Dark ## Surface ## (A12) -San<Jy ## Mucky ## Mineral (S'l) 5 cm Mucky Peat or ## Peat ## (S3) rlctlve Layer (lf ollserved): : r(¡ Hytlrlc soll present? Cumulic epiaquoll, surface horizon is thicker than mapped unit but drainage and subsoil is similar to ## Cordova. This site is located within a slightly concave to plane shaped area within a broad flat area. ## Area is extensively tiled accord¡ng to tile map provided by property owner. ## HYDROLOGY ## SOIL ## Exhibit C - ## Hilger Site 4 ## Sampllng ## Polnt: 4 ## Wetlancl ## Hytlrology lndicators: ## Primary lndicators (rninimum of one is required: check all that apoly) _ ## Surface Water (41) _ ## High Water ## Table (42) _ ## Saturation (43) _Water ## Marks (81) _ ## Sediment Deposits (82) _ ## Drift ## Dspos¡ts (83) ## Algal Mat or Crust (84) _Aquatic ## Fauna (813) ## True ## Aquatic ## Plants (Bl4) - ## Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C'l) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on ## Living ## Roots (ca) -Presence of Reduced lron ## (C4) -Recenl ## lron Reduction in Tilled Soils Secondary lndicators (minimum of two reguired) ## Surface Soil ## Cracks (86) - ## Drainage Patterns (81 0) - ## Dry-Season Water Table ## (C2) -Crayfish ## Bunows ## (CB) -saturation ## Visible on Aerial lmagery ## (C9) -stunted or Stressed ## Plants ## (D1) - ## Geomorphlc Position ## (D2) - ## FAC-Neutral ## Test ## (D5) lron Deposits (85) ## (C6) lnundalion ## Visible on Aerial lnragery (87) -Thin ## Muck ## Surface ## (CZ) ## Sparsely ## Vegetaled Concave ## Surface ## (BB) - ## Gauge or Well Data (Dg) ## Water-Stained ## Leaves (89) - ## Othor (Explain in ## Remarks) ## X Depth (inches); -F-Oepth (inches): -JFoepth (inches): Fleld oDservailonsi Surface water present? Water table present? ## Saluralion prosent? (includes capillary frinse) ## Yes ## Yes ## Yes ## No ## No ## No ## Wêtland hytlrology present? ## N ## Describe recorcJed dala (streant gauge, nronitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ## KemafKs: ## This site rece¡ves direct precipitation but liltle surface runoff from adjacent area. Tlris flat area has been tited extensively according to tile rnap provided by property owner. New road constrt¡clion w/associated deep road ditches has likely reduced any sttbsoil water that the tile is not alreacly draining away. No saturalion or water table observed in soil profìle. ## US Arrny Corps of ## Engineers ## Midwest Region ## MANKATO PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting June 22, 2016 - 6:30 p.m. ## Mankato Room, First Floor, Intergovernmental Center **************************************** Any person speaking to the Commission shall give to the Secretary of the Commission the NAME and HOME ADDRESS of such person prior to speaking. **************************************** ## 1.CALL TO ORDER ## 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA ## 3.APPROVAL OF MINUTES ## May 2016 Minutes ## 4.OLD BUSINESS ## CY26-16   FINAL PLAT REVIEW OF EAGLE BLUFF SUBDIVISION...THE PROPERTY IS ## DESCRIBED AS PART OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 109 NORTH, RANGE 26 ## WEST (LIME TOWNSHIP)...JAMES L. HILGERS ## 5.NEW BUSINESS ## CY27-16   PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT . . . VAN TOL PROPERTIES ADDITION . . . ## TRACT B, RLS 171, PART OF LOTS 1 AND 2, AND LOT 3 HILLTOP ADDITION . . ## . VAN TOL PROPERTIES LLC Anticipated date of Council action will be July 11, 2016 ## CY28-16   CERTIFICATE OF DESIGN COMPLIANCE IN THE DOWNTOWN DESIGN ## DISTRICT.... CARNEGIE ART CENTER... MANKATO AREA ARTS ## COUNCIL...LOTS 7 & 8, BLOCK 27, CITY OF MANKATO (120 SOUTH BROAD ## STREET) ## CY29-16   ORDINANCE AMENDMENT . . . SECTION 10.82, SUBDIVISION 20 (1) . . . ## Planning Commission Regular Meeting ## CY26-16 ## Meeting Date:06/22/2016 ## Title ## FINAL PLAT REVIEW OF EAGLE BLUFF SUBDIVISION...THE PROPERTY IS DESCRIBED AS ## PART OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 109 NORTH, RANGE 26 WEST (LIME TOWNSHIP)...JAMES ## L. HILGERS ## Applicant The applicant, James L. Hilgers, owns the property. ## Request The applicant, James L. Hilgers, is requesting a final plat review of Eagle Bluff Subdivision, a ten-lot subdivision. The property is described as part of Section 36, Township 109 North, Range 26 West (Lime Township). ## Location The property is described as part of Section 36, Township 109 North, Range 26 West (Lime Township). ## Existing Land Use The property has most recently been used for row crops. ## Zoning The property is zoned Agricultural. ## Other Board or Commission The Lime Township Board met on June 14, 2016 and recommended approval of the final plat. ## Site Plan Review Comments The Site Plan and Traffic Advisory Committee met on June 14, 2016 and stated that the flight zones shall be depicted on the plat. ## Review The applicant, James L. Hilgers, is requesting a final plat review of Eagle Bluff Subdivision, a ten-lot subdivision. The property is described as part of Section 36, Township 109 North, Range 26 West (Lime Township). Block 1 of the subdivision is on the western portion of the site.  Block 1 contains Lots 1, 2, and 3.  Lot sizes range from 94,500 square feet to 130,000 square feet. Lot 1 will have access off of the proposed Cody Lane.  Lots 2 and 3 will have a shared driveway accessed via County Road 26. A drainage facility for the subdivision will be constructed on Lots 1 & 2. Block 2 of the subdivision is on the eastern portion of the site.  Block 2 contains seven lots (1-7).  Lot sizes range from 83,400 square feet to 130,500 square feet. Proposed Lot 7 contains the applicant’s dwelling. Access to Block 2 will be provided via Miranda Trail which connects to County Road 26. A drainage facility will be constructed on Lots 6 and 7, Block 2. The site contains 10 lots.  6 of the lots are being relocated from a more restrictive flight zone into the proposed plat. It should be noted that the applicant is only allowed to tranfer lots approved or conditionally approved in the airport flight zone.  The lots within this flight zone will be changed to outlots and become non-buildable lots (Outlots A, B, and C). 3 of the lots are allowed based on the number of quarter-quarter sections within the plat.  The applicant also is granted a bonus lot from 1 of the aforementioned quarter-quarter sections because the applicant owns more than 20 acres in the quarter-quarter section. Outlots D and E are remnant parcels of land that are not buildable. Outlots F and G will be retained for farming. During the original review a number of issues were identified including parcels included in the plat under separate ownership, drainage, an unsealed well, and street naming. Mr. Hilgers is subdividing the property which has been previously approved by the Lime Township Board and the Lime Township Planning Board as a preliminary plat.  During the previous reviews of the plat, a piece of Mankato Regional Airport property was included in the plat which raised concerns from an abutting property owner.  That lot has been removed from the plat.  The Mankato Regional Airport property is in the disposal process. The applicant has submitted a drainage report that identifies improvements needed as the property is developed. The unsealed well that was discussed in the preliminary review of the project was identified.  The well is not on property within the subdivision and the property owner is working with Blue Earth County to have the well sealed. Staff contacted Blue Earth County staff regarding the street naming scheme.  Blue Earth County staff stated the street naming scheme is acceptable and conforms to the standard.  County staff considered other properties within the zip code prior to making this determination. The applicant is working with a septic installer to determine a new location for the secondary septic systems. ## Findings Staff submits the following findings: 1. The final plat conforms to the Lime Township Zoning Ordinance. 2. The final plat conforms to the City of Mankato and ? Lime Township Orderly Annexation Agreement. ## Recommendation Staff recommends the approval of the final plat. ## Attachments ## General Location Map ## Final Plat ## Drainage Report Th is informa tion is to be used for reference purposes only. The City of Mankato does not guarantee accuracy of the material contain ed herein and is n ot re sponsible for misus e or misinterpretation. % ## Date: May 2016 ## Author: ## General Location Map Wetland 2 Wetland 1 ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 10:46 AM ## Exhibit X-1: Historical Imagery 1938-1950 August 2025 ! ## I Wetland 2 Wetland 1 19381950 0240120 ## Feet ## Source: FSA Imagery ## Source: FSA Imagery ## Eagle Bluff ## Lime Township, Blue Earth County, MN Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. ## 1960 Premier Drive ## Mankato, MN 65001 ## P: (507) 625-4171 ## BMI Project No. 25X.137409.000 ## Eagle Bluff ## Wetland Delineation Report ## Lime Township, Blue Earth County, Minnesota ## Jim Hilgers August 6, 2025 ## Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Table of Contents Eagle Bluff ǀ 25X.137409.000 Page i ## Table of Contents I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 II. Wetland Delineation Methodology ...................................................................................................... 1 III. Background Information ...................................................................................................................... 1 IV. Climate Data ......................................................................................................................................... 2 V. Findings ................................................................................................................................................. 2 VI. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 4 ## Tables Wetland Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 5 ## Exhibits Monthly Temperature Range ........................................................................................................................ 2 Antecedent Precipitation Conditions ............................................................................................................ 2 ## Appendix ## Appendix: Exhibits ## Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Introduction Eagle Bluff ǀ 25X.137409.000 Page 1 ## I. Introduction Jim Hilgers is proposing site improvements to his property located South of Highway 26 in Lime Township, Minnesota. This report details the findings of the field delineation completed on July 30 th , 2025. The project is found in Section 36, in Township 109 North of Range 26 West. ## II. Wetland Delineation Methodology The wetland boundaries were delineated and staked in the field in July 2025, using methods described in the “Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0)”. Wetlands identified were classified using “Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin, et al., 1979)”, “Wetlands of the United States (United States Fish and Wildlife Service Circular No. 39, 1971 edition)” and “Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and Wisconsin” (Eggers and Reed Third Edition). Subsequently, the three mandatory technical criteria for wetland determinations are as follows: Hydrophytic Vegetation. A hydrophytic plant community is present when the dominant plant species present can endure prolonged inundation and/or soil saturation during the growing season. A plant’s Wetland Indicator Status is determined using the 2016 National Wetland Plant List for Minnesota, published by the Army Corp of Engineers. Hydric Soils. A hydric soil is defined as a soil that is formed under conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season (the portion of the year when there is above ground growth and development of vascular plants and/or soil temperature at 12 inches below the soil surface is above 41 degrees Fahrenheit or higher) to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. Wetland Hydrology. An area has wetland hydrology if it experiences 14 or more consecutive days of flooding, ponding or a water table within 12 inches of the surface during the growing season at a minimum frequency of five out of ten years. This is determined by using both primary and secondary Wetland Hydrology indicators. ## III. Background Information Prior to conducting a field investigation of this site, Exhibits A through E were used to complete a preliminary evaluation. The data gathered during the preliminary investigation was used as described below: Exhibit A is a location map of the study area. Exhibits B is an aerial photo with topographic information overlaid on it. This provides information regarding topography of the site, helping to identify areas that may have wetland characteristics. Exhibit C is the National Wetlands Inventory of the site and surrounding properties. This information is used to complete a preliminary investigation of the wetlands that may or may not exist on the site. Exhibit D is used to identify waters that are regulated by the DNR. This exhibit shows where there are DNR public waters relative to the site. Exhibit E is the Blue Earth County Soil Survey and is used to identify hydric soils that may lie within the study area. Delineation Exhibits F and G were prepared from the information gathered at the site. Exhibit F is the site map showing the delineated aquatic resources. Exhibit G includes the wetland delineation data sheets. ## Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Climate Data Eagle Bluff ǀ 25X.137409.000 Page 2 ## IV. Climate Data The table below shows the average temperature range for the three months before the field delineation, along with the daily maximums and minimums. While there were some notable cold periods in May. A majority of days in June and July exceeded the normal temperature range. ## Temperature Range Antecedent precipitation was evaluated using a combination of the NRCS Method and the Rolling Totals Method. The analysis found that precipitation was well above normal over the past three months, prior to the site visit. ## Antecedent Precipitation Conditions This climatic data was gathered using the National Weather Service (Climate (weather.gov)), Minnesota State Climatology Office, Nearest Station Precipitation Data Retrieval (HIgh DENsity radius retrieval 071210 (state.mn.us), and Precipitation Data Retrieved from a Gridded Database (Precipitation Data Retrieval (state.mn.us). As well as the ACIS NOAA Regional Climate Centers ## Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Findings Eagle Bluff ǀ 25X.137409.000 Page 3 Website (AgACIS (rcc-acis.org). The information was retrieved from the WETS station, Mankato. ## V. Findings On July 30, 2025, a field investigation was performed to evaluate and verify the existence and boundary of any aquatic resources located within the study area. Two wetlands were found to exist within the study area. The following describes the aquatic resources identified, together with a brief description of wetland types and observations made during the field investigation. Wetland 1: ## NWI Cowardin: None ## PWI (Hydro) ID: None ## HGM: Lacustrine ## Field Observation Circular 39: Type 2 ## Field Observation Eggers and Reed: ## Fresh Wet Meadow ## Soil Mapping Unit(s): 94B-Terril loam, 238B-Kilkenny clay loam, 211-Lura silty clay Wetland 1 is located along the Southern border of study area block 1. It lies just to the north of NWI POF1A. The field investigation found that the site has met all three wetland indicators, and this wetland complex should be considered a combination of ## a HGM Classification Lacustrine, palustrine emergent nonpersistent seasonally saturated (PEM2B). Two sample points were taken to determine the wetland boundary. The wetland boundary was largely drawn based on the changes in topography. At the W1-A wetland pit location, the plant community was dominated by Reed canary grass. The W1-B upland pit location was also Reed canary grass with some Stinging nettle. Both locations met hydrophytic vegetation. Soils in the W1-A wetland pit location met the hydric soil indicator A12-Thick Dark Surface. Soils in the W1-B upland pit location met the hydric soil indicator A12-Thick Dark Surface. Depletion below 34 inches of both pits is assumed to be present. The W1-A wetland location met the hydrology indicators A3-Saturation, D5-FAC-Neutral Test, and D2-Geomorphic Position. The W1-B upland pit location met D5-FAC-nuetral Test. W1-B did not meet hydrology. Photo 1: View of the W1-A & W1-B sample points looking into the wetland (West). ## Photo 2: View of the Fresh Wet Meadow, facing West ## Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Conclusion Eagle Bluff ǀ 25X.137409.000 Page 4 Wetland 2: ## NWI Cowardin: None ## PWI (Hydro) ID: None ## HGM: Depression ## Field Observation Circular 39: Type 2&3 ## Field Observation Eggers and Reed: Fresh ## Wet Meadow, Shallow Marsh ## Soil Mapping Unit(s): 238B-Kilkenny clay loam, 211-Lura silty clay, 239-Le Sueur loam Wetland 2 is located along the Western edge of study block 2. It is a constructed drainage pond that sits between two properties. The field investigation found that the site has met all three wetland indicators, and this wetland complex should be considered a combination of a HGM Classification Depression, palustrine emergent nonpersistent seasonally saturated (PEM2B) and palustrine emergent persistent semi permanently flooded (PEM1F). Two sample points were taken to determine the wetland boundary. The wetland boundary was largely drawn based on the changes in topography and vegetation. At the W2-A wetland pit location, the plant community was dominated by Narrow-leaf cattails and Spotted touch-me-not. W2-A met hydrophytic vegetation. The W2-B upland pit location was a mixture of Perennial sow thistle, Canadian thistle, Kentucky bluegrass, Timothy, and Smooth brome. W2-B did not meet hydrophytic vegetation. Soils in the W2-A wetland pit location met the hydric soil indicator A12-Thick Dark Surface. Soil in the W2-B upland pit location did not meet the hydric soil indicators. The W2-A wetland location met A2-High water Table and A3-Saturation, the secondary hydrology indicator D5- FAC-Neutral Test. The W2-B upland pit location did not meet hydrology. ## VI. Conclusion The delineation was performed on July 30, 2025. The boundaries of the wetlands were staked in the field with three foot “Wetland Delineation” pin flags. The location of the pin flags were surveyed by Bolton & Menk, Inc. using a Juniper Geode Data Collector and tied to the Blue Earth County coordinate system. The delineated limits are believed to be the upper limits of where all three of the required wetland criteria were present. Photo 3: View of the Wetland 2, facing North. Photo 3: View of the W2-A & W2-B sample points ## Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Conclusion Eagle Bluff ǀ 25X.137409.000 Page 5 Bolton & Menk, Inc., was asked to determine the boundaries of those jurisdictional wetlands that exist upon this property as defined by the Wetland Conservation Act. Based upon all available information, the existing conditions that currently prevail, and the on-site investigation, evidence supports the presence of two wetlands within the boundaries of the study area. ## Wetland Summary ## Id # Wetland Type ^ Size* W1 Type 2 0.06 ac W2 Type 2, 3 0.44 ac Total: 0.5 ac *size measured within study area ^wetland type within study area ## Sincerely, Bolton & Menk, Inc. ## Cortiney Galuska ## Certified Wetland Delineator (Wetland Delineator In-Training), No. 5499 ## Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc. Appendix Eagle Bluff ǀ 25X.137409.000 ## Appendix: Exhibits ) * 14 )* 14 ## G ## V ## W ## X 56 ## GVWX 55 ## GVWX 27 ## GVWX 86 ## GVWX 86 ## GVWX 3 ## GVWX 26 ## G ## V ## W ## X 17 ## GVWX 27 ## G ## V ## W ## X 12 ## ?@A@ 22 ## ?@A@ 60 ## ?@A@ 60 ## M A N K A T O ## E A G L E ## L A K E ## S ## T 170 ## ST 187 ## Watonwan ## Le Sueur ## Nicollet ## Blue Earth ## Brown ## Martin ## Faribault ## Waseca 04,500 ## Feet ## Source: MnGeo WMS Imagery (2023) ## Study Area ## City Limits ## Railroad ## PWI Basin ! ## I ## Legend ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Exhibit F: Wetland Delineation Map | Username: noah.wilmes | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 9:20 AM ## Exhibit A: Location Map ## Eagle Bluff ## Jim Hilgers August 2025August 2025 ## GVWX 26 1022 1 0 1 6 1 0 0 4 1006 996 9 9 4 1 0 1 8 1 0 0 8 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 2 9 9 8 1022 1018 1 0 1 4 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 8 1 0 0 6 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 6 1004 1 0 2 2 992 9 8 8 1 0 1 4 1016 1 0 1 8 1 0 0 2 1022 1 0 1 6 1 0 1 4 1 0 1 4 1 0 0 8 988 1 0 1 0 1000 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 1010 1020 9 9 0 990 1020 1 0 0 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 ## Cody LN 230 St 0200 ## Feet ## Source: MnGeo WMS Imagery (2023) ## Study Area 10' Contours 2' Contours ! ## I ## Legend ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Exhibit F: Wetland Delineation Map | Username: noah.wilmes | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 9:20 AM ## Exhibit B: 2-Foot LiDAR ## Eagle Bluff ## Jim Hilgers August 2025August 2025 ## GVWX 26 ## L2UBH ## PABF ## PEM1A ## PEM1A ## PEM1A ## PEM1A ## PEM1C ## PEM1C ## PEM1C ## PFO1A ## PFO1A ## PFO1C ## PSS1A ## Cody LN 230 St 0200 ## Feet ## Source: MnGeo WMS Imagery (2023) ## Study Area ## NWI Wetlands ! ## I ## Legend ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Exhibit F: Wetland Delineation Map | Username: noah.wilmes | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 9:20 AM ## Exhibit C: National Wetland Inventory ## Eagle Bluff ## Jim Hilgers August 2025August 2025 ## GVWX 86 ## GVWX 26 ## ST 187 ## Eagle Lake 597th ## Ave 594th Ave ## Cody LN 230th St ## Miranda TRL 594th AVE 230 St 0800 ## Feet ## Source: MnGeo WMS Imagery (2023) ## Study Area ## PWI Basin ## PWI Watercourse ! ## I ## Legend ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Exhibit F: Wetland Delineation Map | Username: noah.wilmes | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 9:20 AM ## Exhibit D: Public Water Inventory ## Eagle Bluff ## Jim Hilgers August 2025August 2025 109 211 109 1032 239 239 ## 94B ## 238C 1032 239 ## W ## 238B 525 239 524 109 ## 238B 1053 211 239 0350 ## Feet ## Source: MnGeo WMS Imagery (2023) ## Study Area ## County Soils ## Water ## Non-Hydric Soils ## Unranked ## Hydric Soils ! ## I ## Legend ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Exhibit F: Wetland Delineation Map | Username: noah.wilmes | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 9:20 AM ## Exhibit E: County Soil Survey ## NameSlopeHydric RatingHydric Class 94B-Terril loam2-6%8No 211-Lura silty clay0-1%100Yes 238B-Kilkenny clay loam2-6%0No 239-Le Sueur loam1-3%15No ## Eagle Bluff ## Jim Hilgers August 2025August 2025 ^ ^ ! ( ! ( ## Study Block Area 1 ## W1-B ## W1-A Photo 1 Photo 2 Wetland 1: ## HGM: Lacustrine Type 2 - Fresh Wet Meadow - 0.06 ac ## GVWX 26 1006 1 0 0 2 998 9 9 6 9 9 4 992 1022 1018 1 0 1 6 1008 1 0 0 4 1014 1 0 0 8 1 0 0 6 1 0 1 8 1016 1012 1 0 1 4 1 0 0 4 1 0 0 2 1014 1 0 1 2 1016 1 0 1 8 1 0 0 4 1 0 1 6 1 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 1000 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 0 ## Cody LN 230 St 0250 ## Feet ## Source: MnGeo WMS Imagery (2023) ## Study Area ! ( ## Soil Boring ! . ## Culvert ^ ## Photo Location ## Delineated Wetlands ## Type ## Type 2 - Fresh Wet Meadow ## Type 3 - Shallow Marsh ## Contours 10' Contours 2' Contours ! ## I ## Legend ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Exhibit F: Wetland Delineation Map | Username: noah.wilmes | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 10:34 AM ## Exhibit F-1: Wetland Delineation Map ## Eagle Bluff ## Jim Hilgers August 2025August 2025 ^ ^ ^ ! . ! ( ! ( ## Study Block Area 2 ## W2-B ## W2-A Photo 5 Photo 4 Wetland 2: ## HGM: Depression Type 2 - Fresh Wet Meadow - 0.22 ac Type 3 - Shallow Marsh - 0.22 ac Photo 3 ## G ## V ## W ## X 26 1 0 1 4 1012 1 0 1 8 1016 1 0 0 8 1 0 0 6 1 0 1 8 1 0 0 8 1006 1004 1002 998 988 1018 1016 1004 1010 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 1000 1020 230 St 0250 ## Feet ## Source: MnGeo WMS Imagery (2023) ## Study Area ! ( ## Soil Boring ! . ## Culvert ^ ## Photo Location ## Delineated Wetlands ## Type ## Type 2 - Fresh Wet Meadow ## Type 3 - Shallow Marsh ## Contours 10' Contours 2' Contours ! ## I ## Legend ## Map Document: ## H:\HILGERJI_PR\25X137409000\GIS\Natural_Resources\Pro\137409_Wetland_Delineation.aprx | Exhibit F: Wetland Delineation Map | Username: noah.wilmes | Date Saved: 8/6/2025 10:34 AM ## Exhibit F-2: Wetland Delineation Map ## Eagle Bluff ## Jim Hilgers August 2025August 2025 ## Project/Site: ## Applicant/Owner:State: ## Investigator(s) : Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Slope (%):Lat: ## Soil Map Unit Name: ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or HydrologyAre “Normal Circumstances” present?YesNo ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. ## Yes ## YesYes ## Yes ) 1. ## 2.(A) 3. ## 4.(B) 5. ## (A/B) ## Sapling/Shrub Stratum 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = 1.Column Totals ## :(A)(B) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 4 - Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 9. 10 . ## Woody Vine Stratum 1. 2. ## Yes ) =Total Cover naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? UPL species (Plot size:Tree Stratum ## Absolute % Cover ## Sampling Point: ## Section, Township, Range: Local relief (concave, convex, none): ## Long:Datum: ## Remarks: NWI classification: ## YesNo ## No ## Prevalence Index worksheet: ## City/County: ## Hydrophytic ## Vegetation ## Present?No ## Number of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ## Sampling Date: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Total % Cover of: ) ## Indicator ## Status ## Dominant Species? ## Herb Stratum (Plot size: Wetland Hydrology Present? ) Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1 FACU species (Plot size: ## Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) OBL species FACW species FAC species ## Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: =Total Cover ## Percent of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 - Dominance Test is >50% =Total Cover ## 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ## Prevalence Index = B/A = Multiply by: (Plot size: ## U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ## WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Midwest Region See ERDC/EL TR-10-16; the proponent agency is CECW-COR OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 09/30/2027 ## Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) ## Total Number of Dominant Species ## Across All Strata: ## Dominance Test worksheet: ## No ## No ## No VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. ## Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## Eagle Bluff ## Blue Earth County 2025-07-30 ## Jim Hilger ## Minnesota ## W1-A ## Noah Wilmes, Cortiney Galuska sec 36 T109N R026W ## Toeslope ## None 0-2 44.199171 ## -93.907628WGS84 Muskego soils, 0 to 1 percent slopesPEM1C 3 3 3 3 3 3 30' radius Fraxinus pennsylvanica20YFACW 20.0 15' radius Phalaris arundinacea95YFACW Urtica dioica5NFACW 100.0 5' radius 0 30' radius 0 2 2 100.00 0 0 120 240 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 240.00 2.0 3 3 3 3 ## Sampling Point: %% ## Type 1 ## Loc 2 ## Type: ## Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) ## Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ## Surface Water Present?Yes ## Water Table Present?Yes ## Saturation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo ## Geomorphic Position (D2) ## No ## No ## No Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): ## Field Observations: ## SOIL Restrictive Layer (if observed): ## Remarks: ## Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ## Crayfish Burrows (C8) ## Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ## FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ## Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ## Sediment Deposits (B2) ## Drift Deposits (B3) ## Water Marks (B1) ## Iron Deposits (B5) ## Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ## HYDROLOGY ## Water-Stained Leaves (B9) ## Aquatic Fauna (B13) ## True Aquatic Plants (B14) ## Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) ## Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ## Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ## Thin Muck Surface (C7) ## Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ## Drainage Patterns (B10) ## Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) ## Remarks: ## Surface Water (A1) ## High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) ## Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) unless disturbed or problematic. wetland hydrology must be present, 1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. ## Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : ## Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) ## Red Parent Material (F21) Very ## Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ## Sandy Redox (S5) ## Depleted Matrix (F3) ## Redox Dark Surface (F6) ## Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ## Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ## Matrix TextureRemarksColor (moist) ## Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Histosol (A1) ## Histic Epipedon (A2) ## Black Histic (A3) ## Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ## Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) ## Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ## Thick Dark Surface (A12) ## Iron Monosulfide (A18) ## Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) ## Stripped Matrix (S6) ## Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) ## Dark Surface (S7) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ## Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist) ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## W1-A 0-34 ## 10YR2/1100 ## SIL 3 Assuming depletion below 3 4 3 3 3 3 24 3 3 3 ## Project/Site: ## Applicant/Owner:State: ## Investigator(s) : Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Slope (%):Lat: ## Soil Map Unit Name: ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or HydrologyAre “Normal Circumstances” present?YesNo ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. ## Yes ## YesYes ## Yes ) 1. ## 2.(A) 3. ## 4.(B) 5. ## (A/B) ## Sapling/Shrub Stratum 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = 1.Column Totals ## :(A)(B) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 4 - Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 9. 10 . ## Woody Vine Stratum 1. 2. ## Yes ) =Total Cover naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? UPL species (Plot size:Tree Stratum ## Absolute % Cover ## Sampling Point: ## Section, Township, Range: Local relief (concave, convex, none): ## Long:Datum: ## Remarks: NWI classification: ## YesNo ## No ## Prevalence Index worksheet: ## City/County: ## Hydrophytic ## Vegetation ## Present?No ## Number of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ## Sampling Date: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Total % Cover of: ) ## Indicator ## Status ## Dominant Species? ## Herb Stratum (Plot size: Wetland Hydrology Present? ) Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1 FACU species (Plot size: ## Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) OBL species FACW species FAC species ## Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: =Total Cover ## Percent of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 - Dominance Test is >50% =Total Cover ## 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ## Prevalence Index = B/A = Multiply by: (Plot size: ## U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ## WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Midwest Region See ERDC/EL TR-10-16; the proponent agency is CECW-COR OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 09/30/2027 ## Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) ## Total Number of Dominant Species ## Across All Strata: ## Dominance Test worksheet: ## No ## No ## No VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. ## Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## Eagle Bluff ## Blue Earth County 2025-07-30 ## Jim Hilger ## Minnesota ## W1-B ## Noah Wilmes, Cortiney Galuska sec 36 T109N R026W ## Footslope ## None 3-7 44.203461 ## -93.903768WGS84 Lura silty clay, 0 to 1 percent slopesNone 3 3 3 3 3 3 30' radius 0 15' radius 0 5' radius Phalaris arundinacea100YFACW 100.0 30' radius 0 1 1 100.00 0 0 100 200 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 200.00 2.0 3 3 3 3 ## Sampling Point: %% ## Type 1 ## Loc 2 ## Type: ## Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) ## Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ## Surface Water Present?Yes ## Water Table Present?Yes ## Saturation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo ## Geomorphic Position (D2) ## No ## No ## No Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): ## Field Observations: ## SOIL Restrictive Layer (if observed): ## Remarks: ## Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ## Crayfish Burrows (C8) ## Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ## FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ## Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ## Sediment Deposits (B2) ## Drift Deposits (B3) ## Water Marks (B1) ## Iron Deposits (B5) ## Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ## HYDROLOGY ## Water-Stained Leaves (B9) ## Aquatic Fauna (B13) ## True Aquatic Plants (B14) ## Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) ## Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ## Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ## Thin Muck Surface (C7) ## Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ## Drainage Patterns (B10) ## Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) ## Remarks: ## Surface Water (A1) ## High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) ## Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) unless disturbed or problematic. wetland hydrology must be present, 1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. ## Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : ## Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) ## Red Parent Material (F21) Very ## Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ## Sandy Redox (S5) ## Depleted Matrix (F3) ## Redox Dark Surface (F6) ## Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ## Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ## Matrix TextureRemarksColor (moist) ## Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Histosol (A1) ## Histic Epipedon (A2) ## Black Histic (A3) ## Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ## Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) ## Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ## Thick Dark Surface (A12) ## Iron Monosulfide (A18) ## Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) ## Stripped Matrix (S6) ## Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) ## Dark Surface (S7) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ## Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist) ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## W1-B 0-14 ## 10YR2/2100 ## SIL 14-34 ## 10YR2/1100SICL 3 Went down 34” assumed depleted matrix below 3 3 3 3 34 3 3 ## Project/Site: ## Applicant/Owner:State: ## Investigator(s) : Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Slope (%):Lat: ## Soil Map Unit Name: ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or HydrologyAre “Normal Circumstances” present?YesNo ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. ## Yes ## YesYes ## Yes ) 1. ## 2.(A) 3. ## 4.(B) 5. ## (A/B) ## Sapling/Shrub Stratum 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = 1.Column Totals ## :(A)(B) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 4 - Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 9. 10 . ## Woody Vine Stratum 1. 2. ## Yes ) =Total Cover naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? UPL species (Plot size:Tree Stratum ## Absolute % Cover ## Sampling Point: ## Section, Township, Range: Local relief (concave, convex, none): ## Long:Datum: ## Remarks: NWI classification: ## YesNo ## No ## Prevalence Index worksheet: ## City/County: ## Hydrophytic ## Vegetation ## Present?No ## Number of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ## Sampling Date: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Total % Cover of: ) ## Indicator ## Status ## Dominant Species? ## Herb Stratum (Plot size: Wetland Hydrology Present? ) Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1 FACU species (Plot size: ## Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) OBL species FACW species FAC species ## Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: =Total Cover ## Percent of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 - Dominance Test is >50% =Total Cover ## 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ## Prevalence Index = B/A = Multiply by: (Plot size: ## U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ## WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Midwest Region See ERDC/EL TR-10-16; the proponent agency is CECW-COR OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 09/30/2027 ## Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) ## Total Number of Dominant Species ## Across All Strata: ## Dominance Test worksheet: ## No ## No ## No VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. ## Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## Eagle Bluff ## Blue Earth County 2025-07-30 ## Jim Hilger ## Minnesota ## W2-A ## Noah Wilmes, Cortiney Galuska sec 36 T109N R026W ## Toeslope ## None 0-2 44.205060 ## -93.901272WGS84 Le Sueur loam, 1 to 3 percent slopesNone 3 3 3 3 3 3 30' radius 0 15' radius 0 5' radius Typha angustifolia90YOBL Impatiens capensis30YFACW Sonchus arvensis3NFACU 123.0 30' radius 0 2 2 100.00 90 90 30 60 0 0 3 12 0 0 123 162.00 1.32 3 3 3 3 ## Sampling Point: %% ## Type 1 ## Loc 2 ## Type: ## Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) ## Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ## Surface Water Present?Yes ## Water Table Present?Yes ## Saturation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo ## Geomorphic Position (D2) ## No ## No ## No Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): ## Field Observations: ## SOIL Restrictive Layer (if observed): ## Remarks: ## Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ## Crayfish Burrows (C8) ## Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ## FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ## Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ## Sediment Deposits (B2) ## Drift Deposits (B3) ## Water Marks (B1) ## Iron Deposits (B5) ## Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ## HYDROLOGY ## Water-Stained Leaves (B9) ## Aquatic Fauna (B13) ## True Aquatic Plants (B14) ## Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) ## Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ## Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ## Thin Muck Surface (C7) ## Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ## Drainage Patterns (B10) ## Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) ## Remarks: ## Surface Water (A1) ## High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) ## Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) unless disturbed or problematic. wetland hydrology must be present, 1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. ## Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : ## Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) ## Red Parent Material (F21) Very ## Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ## Sandy Redox (S5) ## Depleted Matrix (F3) ## Redox Dark Surface (F6) ## Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ## Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ## Matrix TextureRemarksColor (moist) ## Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Histosol (A1) ## Histic Epipedon (A2) ## Black Histic (A3) ## Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ## Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) ## Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ## Thick Dark Surface (A12) ## Iron Monosulfide (A18) ## Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) ## Stripped Matrix (S6) ## Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) ## Dark Surface (S7) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ## Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist) ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## W2-A 0-28 ## 10YR2/1100 ## SICL 28-35 ## 10YR4/1707.5YR5/830DMSCL 3 Depletion at 30 inches 3 3 3 4 3 3 14 8 3 3 ## Project/Site: ## Applicant/Owner:State: ## Investigator(s) : Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Slope (%):Lat: ## Soil Map Unit Name: ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or HydrologyAre “Normal Circumstances” present?YesNo ## Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. ## Yes ## YesYes ## Yes ) 1. ## 2.(A) 3. ## 4.(B) 5. ## (A/B) ## Sapling/Shrub Stratum 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = x 5 = 1.Column Totals ## :(A)(B) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 4 - Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 9. 10 . ## Woody Vine Stratum 1. 2. ## Yes ) =Total Cover naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) significantly disturbed? UPL species (Plot size:Tree Stratum ## Absolute % Cover ## Sampling Point: ## Section, Township, Range: Local relief (concave, convex, none): ## Long:Datum: ## Remarks: NWI classification: ## YesNo ## No ## Prevalence Index worksheet: ## City/County: ## Hydrophytic ## Vegetation ## Present?No ## Number of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ## Sampling Date: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?(If no, explain in Remarks.) Total % Cover of: ) ## Indicator ## Status ## Dominant Species? ## Herb Stratum (Plot size: Wetland Hydrology Present? ) Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) =Total Cover 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1 FACU species (Plot size: ## Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) OBL species FACW species FAC species ## Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: =Total Cover ## Percent of Dominant Species That ## Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 - Dominance Test is >50% =Total Cover ## 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ## Prevalence Index = B/A = Multiply by: (Plot size: ## U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ## WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Midwest Region See ERDC/EL TR-10-16; the proponent agency is CECW-COR OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 09/30/2027 ## Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a) ## Total Number of Dominant Species ## Across All Strata: ## Dominance Test worksheet: ## No ## No ## No VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants. ## Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Hydric Soil Present? ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## Eagle Bluff ## Blue Earth County 2025-07-30 ## Jim Hilger ## Minnesota ## W2-B ## Noah Wilmes, Cortiney Galuska sec 25 T109N R026W ## Footslope ## None 3-7 44.213906 ## -93.898614WGS84 Hamel loam, 0 to 2 percent slopesNone 4 3 3 3 3 3 30' radius 0 15' radius 0 5' radius Sonchus arvensis65YFACU Cirsium arvense45YFACU Poa pratensis20NFAC Phleum pratenseNFACU Bromus inermis 15 ## 10NFACU 155.0 30' radius 0 0 2 0.00 0 0 0 0 60 20 135 540 0 0 155 600.00 3.87 3 ## Sampling Point: %% ## Type 1 ## Loc 2 ## Type: ## Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?YesNo Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) ## Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) ## Surface Water Present?Yes ## Water Table Present?Yes ## Saturation Present?Yes Wetland Hydrology Present?YesNo ## Geomorphic Position (D2) ## No ## No ## No Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): ## Field Observations: ## SOIL Restrictive Layer (if observed): ## Remarks: ## Dry-Season Water Table (C2) ## Crayfish Burrows (C8) ## Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ## FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ## Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ## Sediment Deposits (B2) ## Drift Deposits (B3) ## Water Marks (B1) ## Iron Deposits (B5) ## Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: ## HYDROLOGY ## Water-Stained Leaves (B9) ## Aquatic Fauna (B13) ## True Aquatic Plants (B14) ## Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ## Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) ## Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ## Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ## Thin Muck Surface (C7) ## Gauge or Well Data (D9) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ## Drainage Patterns (B10) ## Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) ## Remarks: ## Surface Water (A1) ## High Water Table (A2) Saturation (A3) ## Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) unless disturbed or problematic. wetland hydrology must be present, 1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. ## Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : ## Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) ## Red Parent Material (F21) Very ## Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Other (Explain in Remarks) ## Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ## Sandy Redox (S5) ## Depleted Matrix (F3) ## Redox Dark Surface (F6) ## Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ## Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ## Matrix TextureRemarksColor (moist) ## Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Histosol (A1) ## Histic Epipedon (A2) ## Black Histic (A3) ## Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ## Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) ## Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ## Thick Dark Surface (A12) ## Iron Monosulfide (A18) ## Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) ## Stripped Matrix (S6) ## Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) ## Dark Surface (S7) Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) ## Redox FeaturesDepth (inches)Color (moist) ## ENG FORM 6116-7, SEP 2024 Midwest – Version 2.0 ## W2-B 0-36 ## 10YR2/1100 ## SICL 3 Soils most likely disturbed during the construction of retention pond. Soils show upland characteristics below 34”. Soils were dryer and more compacted. 3 3 3 24 3