The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/30/2013 Env Bd Packet• City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting October 30, 2013 6:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Minutes July 31, 2013 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Open Mike 5. Action Items II A. Saddle Club 6. Discussion Items A. New Rare Species Law B Environmental Board Power Point/Environmental Board Discussion C. Community Garden Update D. Blue Heron Days E. Recycling Update F. Wollan Park G. EAB 7. Adjourn • • • • CITY OF LINO LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MINUTES DATE : July 31, 2013 TIME STARTED : 6:36 P. M. TIME ENDED : 7:48 P. M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Mary Jo O'Dea, Barbara Bor, Paula Andrzejewski, Martha DeHaven, Steve Heiskary, Nancie Klebba, Nancy Morin MEMBERS ABSENT : None STAFF PRESENT : Marty Asleson There was an on -site meeting at Emmerich site before the regular scheduled Environmental Board Meeting. 1. CALL TO ORDER Ms. O'Dea called the Environmental Board meeting to order at 6:36 p.m. on July 31, 2013 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 29, 2013 Mr. Heiskary made a motion to approve the May 29, 2013 Meeting Minutes. Ms. Morin seconded the motion to approve the minutes. Motion carried unanimously. June 24. 2013 - The Foxborough Site Visit Ms. Andrzejewski made a motion to approve the June 24. 2013 Meeting Minutes. Ms. DeHaven seconded the motion to approve the minutes. Motion carried unanimously. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Move 6B — Stream Health Evaluation Program, Gary Averback to 6A Move 6A - Emmerich Concept Plan to 6B Ms. Andrzejewski and Ms. DeHaven made a motion to approve the amended agenda. Ms. Bor seconded the motion to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. 4. OPEN MIKE No one present for Open Mike Environmental Board July 31, 2013 Page 2 5. ACTION ITEMS There were no Action Items 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Stream Health Evaluation Program (SHEP) summary for 2013. Gary Averback Mr. Averback mentioned that there are three sites in the area that he has been involved with for the past 6 years. They are Clearwater Creek, Hardwood Creek "above" and Hardwood Creek " below ". Clearwater Creek site is behind Centerville Cit l all has stu wn increasing population in insects and is more stable than Hardwood Creek in that asp t continues to have some of the healthiest water quality scores in the Rice Creek Watershed- Hardwood Creek "above" is mostly pasture land and Hardwood Creek "below" is where improvements have been done to the creek such as bank stabilization and wing dams which were added to increase circulation. Last three years Hardwood Creek continues to show improvement in both water quality and an abundance of habitat. Ms. O'Dea asked are the studies going to continue. Mr. Averback stated that the studies will !continue to keep going as long as there is funding. Friends of the Mississippi are the fund raisers and he belongs to a volunteer group..,:,. Ms. O'Dea asked who did the stream improvements in Hardwood Creek. The answer was that Rice Creek Watershed does the layout of the projects B. Concept Plan Review, Emmerich Concept Plan Ms. O'Dea mentioned that the Emmerich Site Concept Plan was earlier in the evening. Mr. Asleason mentioned that it is a PUD with mixed density. Concerns were raised about traffic on 20th Ave., zoning, in the AUAR or not, water and sewer in the area, wetlands concerns, surface water treatment, and screening. No motion needed this is just an information discussion. There were no other comments. • • Environmental Board July 31, 2013 Page 3 A. Blue Heron Parade Mr. Asleson mentioned to be at the parade staging site at 11:00 am on Saturday, August 17. There will be trash and recycling cans along the parade route and then the containers will be moved to Lino Park for continuing trash and recycling thorough out the day. Ms. O'Dea said it would be nice to advertise the monthly recycle day on the side of the car. Ms. Morin will make the signs. Most of the Environmental Board will be on hand for parade clean up. B. Recycling Updates Mr. Asleson mentioned that the recyu cans at parks is successful. The parks will benefit with this effort. Mr. Asleson will have score report next time. He also mentioned that the monthly recycling may have been doing just as well as the annual City wide event in May. C. Promotional Efforts for Environmental Board in Community Events Mr. Asleson suggested that there is a need for more pictures of community gardens, Blue Herons and other environmental events. Ms. Bor requested information that if there is no Environmental Meeting can the Environmental Board use a room in City Hall for a work session to start on a slide presentation and other related items Asleson stated that he will find out about having a work meeting in City Hall. Mr. Heiskary suggested that a good start would be for the members to start taking pictures of recycling day, community gardens, recycling bins and the blue herons to help with the telling of the story. Ms. Morin suggested in using a 3 ring binder with slide -in sheets, for the Environmental Board information and involvement plus ash borer and organic gardens, that way you can add and remove information when not needed or changed. Ms Bor suggested using some of the SWPPP slides such as the oil spill on the pond, the culvert problem of before and after a storm and then the repairs that were done. • Environmental Board July 31, 2013 Page 4 7. ADJOURNMENT It was noted that the next meeting of the Environmental Board will be on Wednesday August 28, 2013 at 6:30p.m. Ms. Andrzejewski made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:48 p.m. Ms. Moirn seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted by Mary Fogarty Office Tech 1 • • • • • • STAFF ORIGINATOR: MEETING DATE: REQUEST: APPLICANT: OWNER: ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD AGENDA ITEM 5A Marty Asleson, Environmental Coordinator October 30, 2013 Preliminary Plat /PUD Saddle Club Marcel Eibensteiner 1000 County Road E West Shoreview, MN 55126 Dupont Holdings LLC 800 Nicollet Mall #2690 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The applicant has requested a Preliminary Plat review for a proposed low density, single family development on a site known as the Saddle Club. The proposed development site is located northeast of Foxborough, west of the Preserve development, and south and east of the sharp bend in Old Birch Street. It is in the S 1/2 of Section 28. The site is currently guided for low density sewered residential development in the city's comprehensive plan. The property is currently zoned R, Rural and R -1, Single Family Residential District. The project site is a 39.80 acre parcel. The parcel is proposed for platting 55 single family lots. Public sanitary sewer and water utilities are available to service the site. The total upland area for the site is 30.52 acres. The total wetland area is 9.28 acres The city's Parks, Open Space and Trail Plan identifies a proposed greenway corridor running through the site. The greenway is comprised primarily of the Wetland Management Corridor (WMC) established by the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Wetland Management Corridor (WMC). These areas consist of the high value wetlands that support high diversity plant and animal communities and are considered Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA's) in the comprehensive plan. The Saddle Club property represents the final piece of a multifunctional greenway corridor stretching from Deer Lane (west of Foxborough) to Birch Park (east of Preserve at Lino Lakes). Because of the unique nature of the area, staff has recommended and the applicant is proposing to rezone the property to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The PUD process allows for flexibility in site design which aids in the City's attempt to maximize the conservation of land and open space. SITE CHARACTERISTICS Soils Soils in the WMC are very unique. Many banded soil formations in these areas of the Anoka County sand plain, particularly on the southern part of the Saddle Club site, support rare plant species. These plants, for a large part, are located in hydric soils buffering wetlands (See attachment for soils map). The Iw and SoA soils on the map are hydric. Buffer areas are required in the WMC. The buffer area along WMC's must average 50 feet. Since the developer is able to grade in the buffer areas, it is recommended and should be required that all top soils removed from the buffer areas be returned to the same site as much as possible after grading is done. The probable seed bank in these soils cannot be purchased in a store and are a very valuable resource on this development property. Land Cover The Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) is included as an attachment. The MLCCS describes the site as a diversity of different wetland and woodland type features. The site may be choked -out by reed canary grass and opportunistic Aspen encroaching into wetland areas, but does however have the ecologic signatures of soil and hydrology to have a viable diverse native seed bank available. This seed bank most likely has rare plant species in it. For instance, a few hundred meters away is the Preserve conservation development that has rare orchids and bulrush identified on the site. Rare and Unique Resources Because some of the property (particularly the southern part of the property) falls in a WMC area in the Anoka County Sand Plain, and because the ecological characteristics of this parcel have rare plant potential, a rare plant inventory was required of the site. The applicant contracted with Emmons and Oliver Resources (EOR) to perform an inventory for rare plants on the site. This inventory is included as an attachment. EOR did not find any Minnesota listed rare plants. However, it is very likely that several Threatened and Endangered plant species exist in seed -bank areas of the corridor. There are registered rare plants in the conservation area of the Preserve development a few hundred meters away. The soils and hydrologic habitat in the Preserve development are the same as in the Saddle Club. 2 • • • • • • Additionally, there are undocumented observations of two Rubus (Blackberry Species) on the site. These plants are FACU species, meaning they are almost always found in upland or transition areas. Given that the developer is placing most all of the transition areas in buffer or conservation easement, these plants should be protected. The Blandings Turtle Model for Lino Lakes shows activity areas in the area particularly in the Foxburough development to the south and west. Jason Husveth found a Blandings turtle in Foxbourgh, as well as a resident of Foxburough who also found a Blandings turtle during the nesting period. In order to not create any more barriers to the Blandings turtle or any nesting turtle species it is recommended to install a lower profile curb similar to Foxborough in the Saddle Club development. The plans propose an acceptable surmountable curb. Wetlands There are 19 delineated wetlands on the site shown in the Wetland Delineation Attachment. Since the majority of the wetlands on the site fall within the Wetland Management Corridor (WMC) part of the Watershed District Rules, Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MNRAM) for determining wetland quality was required. MNRAM is designed to evaluate the function and value of wetlands. Impact to wetlands in the Management Corridors are mitigated at a higher rate than wetlands that are isolated from the corridor. The developer proposes to place the majority of the corridor within outlots on the south and northeast sides of the site (see attached Preliminary Plat). All outlots should be deeded to the City of Lino Lakes. A conservation easement will be placed over all conservation areas including required buffer areas. Buffer areas must be an average of 50 feet wide along the Wetland Management Corridors. Signs indicating the location of all conservation easements must be placed on all property lines. Up to four signs per lot if necessary are required at all boundary line change areas. Sign design must be approved by the city. See Proposed Conservation Easement Areas on the attached Preliminary Plat. The Grading Plan also lists 60,249 square feet of wetland fill proposed on the site and 112,786 square feet of Wetland Enhancement. These numbers must be verified by Rice Creek Watershed. The RCWD is responsible for permitting under the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). Wetland fill and mitigation requirements will be subject to review and approval of the RCWD. Since it is critical that new homeowners know what the Conservation Easement means in terms of what they can and cannot do in the easement, and why it is important that the easement is there, the developer should produce a handout that gives the homeowner information at the time of purchasing a property. The brochure must be approved by the City. Tree Preservation and New Tree Requirements The following Table "Tree Preservation and Mitigation Standards" is from the updated zoning ordinance. Tree removals are mitigated at rates provided for in the table. Tree Preservation and Mitigation Standards Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA } Category Tree Location: within Basic Use Area Tree Location: within Basic Use Area deciduous trees 6" dbh and over or evergreen trees between 12' -20' tall deciduous trees 6 -12" dbh or evergreen trees between 12' -20' tall deciduous trees over 12" dbh or evergreen trees over 20' tall Non -ESA no mitigation required provide one tree per tree removed provide two trees per tree removed Natural Resource Conservation Area or Natural Resource Corridor Enhancement Area provide one tree per four trees removed provide two trees per tree removed provide three trees per tree removed Natural Resource Protected Area provide one tree per two trees removed provide two trees per tree removed provide three trees per tree removed The Basic Use Area is defined as the area dedicated to site's use, including buildings, parking, loading, driveways, streets, outbuildings, trash enclosures utilities, landscaping and grading necessary for the construction of the above uses. Grading activities and road construction will encroach on both conservation areas and protected areas and will require mitigation in accordance with the standards. However, staff is proposing to allow for removal of green ash (due to the emerald ash borer) without mitigation. Additionally, as a part of our adaptive management techniques, Aspen trees removed within Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA's) will not require replacement provided that all top soils removed from the buffer areas are returned to the same site as much as possible after grading is done Surface Water Management The plat area lies within the Reshanau Lake Management Area. Reshanau Lake is impaired for nutrient loading. Before construction on this site, there are an estimated 39.30 acres of pervious land and 0.50 acres of impervious land. After construction there will be an estimated 32.10 acres of pervious land and 7.70 acres of impervious land. Rule C of the Rice Creek Watershed District Rules, went into effect on July 1, 2013. The rule sets standards to: 4 • • • • • (a) Maximize water quality and flood control on individual project sites through Better Site Design practices and stormwater management. (b) Minimize land use impacts and improve operational and maintenance efficiency by using stormwater BMPs, when needed, regionally unless local resources would be adversely affected. (c) Treat stormwater runoff before discharge to surface water - bodies and wetlands, while considering the historic use of District water features. (d) Ensure that future peak rates of runoff are less than or equal to existing rates. (e) Reduce the existing conditions peak rate of discharge along Lower Rice Creek and the rate of discharge and volume of runoff reaching Long Lake, to preserve the remaining floodplain storage volume within Long Lake and mitigate the historic loss of floodplain storage. (f) Preserve remaining floodplain storage volume within the Rice Creek Watershed to minimize flood potential throughout the District. The development is required to meet both water quality and volume regulations consistent with RCWD and City requirements. A watershed district permit is required for development on this site. There is no confirmation at this time from our City Engineers at WSB or the watershed that the storm features on the site are correctly designed, or control water quality and quantity (no loss of flood plain) requirements are met. One part of the rule that the design does not appear to meet is the infiltration area "separation from the water table ". The elevation difference must be 3 feet. Furthermore; the sand, and highly permeable National Urban Runoff Pond (NURP) portion of the design is also pervious horizontally and can also infiltrate vertically during water table /ground water fluctuations. Contaminants from storm water falling on streets, driveways, rooftops and other impervious areas, flowing into this NURP can enter the Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA). This development site is in the Lino Lakes Central DWSMA area (See Central DWSMA Attachment). If determined that adequate separation is not available, a clay liner may be required to prevent contaminant seepage. The plan also includes the rerouting of an existing private drainage ditch. The ditch currently provides drainage from properties north of the site to County Ditch 25. Drainage capacity of the ditch will be retained. The ditch will be relocated along the north and east corners of the site and located within a conservation easement. The location will provide an additional buffer from adjacent residential uses and provide continuation of the corridor from the Preserve development. The new design will also allow for increased filtration and infiltration opportunities. Use of the PUD process allows for Better Site Design practices throughout the site. Key provisions include: • Reduced right -of -way from 60 feet to 50 feet. • Reduced street width from 32 feet to 28 feet. • Reduced front yard setbacks from 30 feet to 25 feet. These techniques are consistent with those previously implemented in the adjacent Foxborough and Preserve neighborhoods. SWPPP The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must address the following: • Proposed erosion prevention and sediment control BMP's to control the discharge of sediment and/or other pollutants from the site, particularity at the point(s) of intended discharge. All surrounding stormwater inlet drains within 200 feet of the site that have water draining to them must have a city approved stormwater inlet protection device installed prior to construction. • Must provide the knowledgeable person/chain of responsibility information before construction begins. We need the name of the person that is knowledgeable and experienced in the application of erosion prevention before and during construction. The owner must identify who will have the responsibility for long- term operation and maintenance of the permanent stormwater management system. The owner must include in the SWPPP a chain of responsibility with all operators on the site, or if not known, the title or position of the responsibility of responsible party, to ensure that the SWPPP will be implemented and stay in effect until the construction project is complete, the entire site has undergone final stabilization and a "Notice of Termination" has been submitted to the MPCA. • The permitees must, before construction begins, provide training documentation that the individuals listed as SWPPP overseers are certified by a MPCA approved training method. With that, the City would need names of the person or persons involved with SWPPP management, dates of training and the names of instructors of entity providing training, and the content of the training course or workshop including the numbers of hours training, • Information must be submitted to the city on the location of the SWPPP on site and the location of all required weekly, post - rainfall event inspections and follow - up corrections. A hard copy must be kept on site and emailed to the city MS4 manager. • The SWPPP must incorporate the requirements (MPCA Stormwater Discharge Design Requirements) including calculations for the project. • Site specific quantities must be included for all erosion prevention and sediment control BMPs. 6 • • • • • • • Must include maps of all surface waters and wetlands and storm ponds or basins that can be identified on maps such as a USGA 7.5 minute quadrangle map, the NWI maps or equivalent maps within one mile (aerial radius) from the project boundary that will receive stormwater associated with construction activity during or after construction. This site is within one mile of a receiving lake. • The SWPPP must describe a maintenance plan identifying who will be performing future maintenance of permanent stormwater treatment systems on the site. • The SWPPP must identify if the project's stormwater flows to an impaired water within one mile of the site (aerial radius), and whether or not there is USEPA- approved TMDL for pollutants or stressors for the site. The permitee must identify those TMDLs applicable to the to the projects stormwater discharge. This site is within 1 mile of an impaired lake and will act as a receiving water from this site. Landscape Plan A landscape plan was submitted showing the location of proposed boulevard street plantings. City code requires a new tree on the street boulevards on each lot frontage. Species and location of the trees will be made by the City. Additionally, landscaping of open areas is also required. Open areas include disturbed areas exclusive of single family lots. Once the tree mitigation requirements are finalized, the landscaping plan will be updated to address these areas. The rerouted ditch offers opportunity for the planting of these mitigated trees. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat and site plan review including any recommendations of the board. ATTACHMENTS 1. Environmentally Sensitive Areas 2. Soils Map 3. MLCCS 4. Plant Inventory by FOR 5. Wetland Map 6. DWSMA Map 7. Site Location, Title Sheet, Notes and Legend, Saddle Club P.U.D. 8. Erosion Control Plan (2 sheets) 9. Preliminary Plat (2 sheets) 10. Tree Inventory (2 sheets) 11. Preliminary Landscape Plan (2 sheets) 1 1 1 1, O O O O O co 0) O a) J m o0 J -0 V O ca >+ 6 Environmenta • • • M.ZZ 5 oE6 09L8664 0699664 OZ98664 1 0558664 0849664 1 OT48664 04£8664 2 c•, cam) 0 M.ZZ5..E6 N O is o m - ca e ® C) w cam', w 1— Cg o 8 -18 T N CD CD N O au) - J m a N m co a N O _W g z lg a 33 En _$ na K ▪ 2 CITY OF LINO LAKES M .9S. .E6 8 cn 09L9664 0699664 OZ 99660 0558664 0849664 OT49664 04£8664 M 95 5 ..E6 o 0 LO t0 ca Aspen forest Aspen forest C Y O 0 Oak forest Oak forest Willow swamp Aspen forest Mixed hardwood swamp Cattail marsh - seasonally flooded Oak forest 73 a) c Q. L 3 N N w CO 0) >, N LO 2 O n O 7OE o49 C a) ' ) w L. CD O V) •0= E °> ro >' O U c CU N d u) Oak_ orest Oak forest Co 0 =Z • • Emmons & Olivier Resources, Inc. for Royal Oaks Reality, Inc. Saddle Club Rare Plant Species Survey Report 08.20.2013 Eon Cover Images Lett Image: site photo - detail of orchid Platanthera lacera Right Image: site photo - wetland within mesic hardwood forest Document Component Specs Text: Staples • multipurpose paper, 24 Ib. text — 50% post - consumer fibers, FSC Certified. Back Cover: Neenah Paper • Esse • Texture, Sapphire • 100 Ib. cover • 30% post - consumer fibers, Green Seal® Certified Wire Binding: Manufactured using recycled high carbon steel • • FINAL Saddle Club Rare Plant Survey 8 -20 -13 Introduction Emmons and Olivier Resources, Inc. (EOR) has been retained by Royal Oaks Realty, Inc. to conduct a rare plant species survey on a 40 acre parcel known as the Saddle Club. The site is located in Lino Lakes, Anoka County (SE % of SW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 31N, Range 22W) (Map 1). Services being provided by EOR to Royal Oaks Realty are limited to conducting the survey and providing a report documenting our findings. A wetland delineation was conducted at the site by Earth Science Associates, Inc. on 19 June 2013, and the site was surveyed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. A tree inventory was also included as part of the survey conducted by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. The findings of this report are intended to be used for preliminary site planning purposes as well as inputs into the MnRAM used to define Wetland Management Corridors per the Rice Creek Watershed District and the City of Lino Lakes permitting requirements. This rare plant survey was not triggered by environmental review requirements. Although EOR coordinated with DNR staff in development of the survey protocol and targeted rare species, a Natural Heritage Database Request has not been submitted at the time this report was finalized. Survey Methods Desktop /Preparatory Work EOR conducted an initial desk top review of the site using current aerial photographs (Map 2), and topographic and soils maps (Map 3). EOR conducted an initial site visit on 18 July 2013 to determine habitats at the site in order to develop a list of rare species that may occur at the site. The site was found to contain a mosaic of habitats including grassland /prairie, wet meadows, open water marshes/ ponds, hardwood forests, and lowland forests that range from disturbed to fairly intact. A portion of the site was formerly used as horse pasture and stable. To determine which rare plant species may occur at the site, EOR consulted the MN DNR Rare Species Guide, MNTaxa: The State of Minnesota Vascular Plant Checklist (Anoka County), previous surveys within Anoka County (Husveth 2003), and the Minnesota Biological Survey Natural Community and Rare Species Map for Anoka and Ramsey County. A thorough documentation of each species life history characteristics and physical description was recorded to aid in the field survey. Descriptions of the targeted species and their habitats are based on the MN DNR Rare Species Guide. Based on the desktop review of the site, site visit, and the resources listed above, the rare plant species listed below were identified as having potential to occur at the site. Sea -beach needlegrass (Aristida tuberculosa) occurs exclusively in dry, loose sand in sand savannas, sand prairies, and dunes where vegetation is sparse. St. Lawrence grapefern (Botrychium rugulosum) grows in low, moist habitats in brushy or grassy areas and in open forest areas, as well as in mossy areas of Pinus banksiana (jack pine) or P. resinosa (red pine) forests. It also occurs in the transition zone between these habitats and adjacent habitats. • • • FINAL Saddle Club Rare Plant Survey 8 -20 -13 Kitten -tails (Besseya bullii) is a species of oak savanna communities, and also occurs in dry prairies and oak woodlands (including dry-mesic oak (maple) woodlands, dry -mesic oak - hickory woodlands, and dry- mesic pine -oak woodlands). Autumn fimbristylis (Fimbristylis autumnalis) occurs in slight depressions in the terrain that may have ponded water for much of the season and support tall, lush growth of Typha spp. (cattails) and Schoenoplectus spp. (bulrushes). Typically, F. autumnalis occurs at slightly higher elevations where the soil surface is only moist and the vegetation is dominated by short- stature Carex spp. (sedges). The substrate is usually sandy with perhaps a thin layer of organic material such as peat. Marginated rush (Juncus marginatus) is a species of shallow wetlands and wetland margins on the Anoka Sand Plain. Low - stature sedges and rushes usually dominate these habitats although scattered shrubs or clumps of shrubs, particularly Salix spp. (willows), Cornus spp. (dogwoods), and Rubus spp. (bristle- berries and dew - berries), may also be present. Tubercled rein - orchid (Platanthera (lava var. herbiola) occurs in wet prairies and meadows, swales in mesic prairies, or the sandy or peaty habitats along the edges of marshes, swamps, or lakeshores. Cross - leaved milkwort (Polygala cruciata var. aquilonia) occurs on wet, sandy shores of shallow lakes in the Anoka Sand Plain, and in sandy or peaty meadows or swales. These habitats may be in low depressions or at the margins of emergent wetlands. Tooth -cup (Rotala ramosior) typically occurs on the sandy shores of small, shallow lakes set in a savanna landscape. Bristleberry (Rubus stipulates) generally occurs on moist, sandy substrates in wetland to upland habitats, including bogs and bog margins, lake shores, swales, marshes and marsh margins, swamps, meadows and fields, sand prairies, woods, thickets, and roadsides. Vermont blackberry (Rubus vermontanus) is found in forest edges, grasslands, meadows and fields. Tall nut rush (Scleria triglomerata) is found in sand savannas and sand prairies, often in areas of sand dune formations. They are found in localized microhabitats at each site, usually in moist soil near wet swales or wet meadows. Clinton's bulrush (Trichophorum clintonii) typically occurs in open, sunny habitats in moist or dry, sandy or sandy -loam soils, although it may occur in partially shaded savanna or woodland settings. Lance - leaved violet (Viola lanceolata) occurs in moist meadows with a sandy substrate and moist swales in sand dunes and savannas. Twisted yellow -eyed grass (Xyris torta) occurs in wet, sandy shores of shallow lakes in the Anoka Sand Plain and in sandy or peaty meadows or swales. • • • FINAL Saddle Club Rare Plant Survey 8 -20 -13 Field Survey Methods The site was surveyed by Annie Weeks and Jason Naber on 29 July, 30 July and 31 July 2013. Wet meadows, wetland margins (based on the wetland delineation by Earth Science Associates, Inc.), and ecotones of the site, were intensively surveyed, as these are the locations that rare plants are most likely to occur. These areas were surveyed using a phalanx formation with two individuals spaced approximately 3 -5 meters apart. Woodlands were surveyed using wider transects, approximately 20 meters apart, as these areas are Tess likely to harbor the rare plants listed above. GPS waypoints were recorded at several locations across the site where species lists were compiled (Map 4). Any species that could not be identified in the field were photographed in detail and later identified using Gleason and Cronquist (1991) or various field guides. No voucher specimens were collected. Results No state or federally listed rare plant species were observed during the survey. However, the site does contain suitable habitat for many of the rare species listed above, and several species that are indicators of high quality habitats were observed. Below are descriptions of plant communities within the site. Note: the species listed below are not complete species lists within each plant community, but species that were the most common/ dominant. The eastern half of the site contains intact wet meadows, oak and aspen woodlands, marshes, and ecotones that are relatively undisturbed and have a low density of invasive species. Species observed within the wet meadows include Polygala sanguinea, Spirea tomentosa, Monarda fistulosa, Solidago spp., Verbena hastata, Lycopus uniflous, Potentilla simplex, Lobelia spicata, Thelypteris palustris, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Asclepias syrica, Achillea millefolium, Salix interior, Euphorbia corollata, and Lespedeza capitata (Map 4, points 1, 16). The presence of Polygala sanguinea is known to be an indicator of Polygala cruciata, a state endangered species. Invasive species observed within the meadows include Linaria vulgaris, Coronilla varia, Euphorbia cyparissias, Poa pratensis, and Phleum pretense, and Rumex acetosella. Although, the meadows contain several invasive species, native species are dominant and diversity is high. Aspen appears to be encroaching on the meadows from the edges, but there are no woody species within the open wet meadows, indicating that the structure of the meadows is intact. Ecotones between the wet meadows and woodlands on the eastern half of the site were, generally, in good condition, and had low densities of invasive species. Species along the margins of the woodlands and meadows included Corylus americana, Athyrium filix femina, Asclepias syriaca, Cornus spp., Eupatorium maculatum, Thelypteris palustris, Spirea alba, Persicaria amphibian, Osmunda claytoniana, Onoclea sensibilis, Thalictrum dasycarpum, and Geranium maculatum, Populus tremuloides, (Map 4, points 2, 8, 14, 17, 18). An intact sedge meadow with a high diversity of native species also occurs on the eastern edge of the site (Map 4, point 15). The margins of all the open water marshes on the site were invaded by reed canary grass (Map 4, point 6, 21, 22, 23). A large patch of reed canary grass also occurs in one wetland area in the northeastern corner of the site (Map 4, point 7). Woodlands on the site are diverse and include upland oak and aspen woodlands, forested wetlands (Map 4, point 24), and lowland hardwood forests (Map 4, point 19) comprised of Fraxinus pennsylvanica • • • FINAL Saddle Club Rare Plant Survey 8 -20 -13 and Acer saccharinum. Within all woodlands, fern diversity was high and included Athyrium filix femina, Thelypteris palustris, Osmunda claytoniana, Osmunda regalis, Onoclea sensibilis. Other species in the woodlands included Carex pennsylvanica, Amphicarpaea bracteata, Eurybia macrophylla, Arisaema triphyllum, Scuttelaria spp., Desmodium glutinosum, Quercus rubra, Galium spp., Corylus americana, and Geranium maculatum (Map 4, point 10, 19, 20, 25). Woodlands on the western half of the site had a higher density of common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) than on the eastern half of the site; however, the buckthorn occurs in patches (Map 4, point 5, 27). Other areas are dominated by native species in all strata (Map 4, point 11, 28). The old fields in the center of the site and in the northeastern corner (Map 4, points 3, 4, 9, 12) are comprised of non - native pasture species and ruderal native species, including Rumex acetosella, Bromus inermis, Trifolium pretense, Phleum pretense, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Poa pratensis, Silene spp., Asclepias syriaca, Elytrigia repens, and Achillea millefolium, Oenothera biennis, Verbascum thapsus, and Linaria vulgaris. The old field also contains a small population of Lespedeza capitata (Map 4, point 12). The cover of vegetation is fairly low as there is a lot of bare/ open soil. One species of orchid was observed near the eastern boundary of the site (Map 4, point 13). This species was identified as ragged fringed orchid (Platanthera lacera), and only two individuals were observed. Orchids are typically indicators of high quality habitat that may provide habitat for other rare species; however, no other rare species were observed within the vicinity of the ragged fringed orchids. Other plant species surrounding the orchids included Galium spp., Impatiens pallida, Cornus spp., Onoclea sensibilis, Athyrium filix femina, Thalictrum dasycarpum, Geranium maculatum, and Rubus spp. Rubus species at the site were very abundant and diverse, especially within the meadows and ecotones between meadows and woodlands on the eastern half of the site. None of the species that were observed were identified as a rare species listed above. Seasonal timing of the site survey provided a challenge for identifying Rubus spp. because flowers were not present. Several additional Rubus species are proposed for state - listing, including Rubus semisetosus, Rubus missouricus, Rubus multifer, and Rubus fulleri. The site provides suitable habitat for all these species which are associated with wet meadows, ecotones, or oak -aspen woodlands on the Anoka Sand Plain. Summary No rare species were observed during the July site visit; however, the site contains high quality plant communities that could provide habitat for rare species that are currently listed or are proposed for state listing. The eastern half of the site is generally in better condition than the western half of the site. The western side of the site contains a higher density of invasive species, especially common buckthorn in the woodlands. Sources Gleason, H. A. and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of the Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. 2nd ed. New York Botanical Garden, New York. Husveth, J. Ecological Surveys of Rare Plants and Plant Communities in Eastern Anoka County, Minnesota. Critical Connections, Inc. January 13, 2003 • • FINAL Saddle Club Rare Plant Survey 8 -20 -13 Minnesota Biological Survey Native Plant Community and Rare Species County Maps http: // www. dnr .state.mn.us /eco /mcbs /maps.html Accessed 24 June 2013 MN DNR Rare Species Guide - http: // www .dnr.state.mn.us /rsg/index.html Accessed 24 June 2013. MNTaxa: The State of Minnesota Vascular Plant Checklist - http: / /www.dnr.state.mn.us /eco /mcbs /plant lists.html Accessed 24 June 2013 Nancy Sather, personal communication, 18 July 2013. Regional Landscape Ecosystems of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin: Anoka Sand Plain. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/habitat/rlandscp/sub3-3.htm • • pr Map 1. Project Location ME=IIMM7 Cr O7 5 1 5 6 Saddle Club Site Pi oject 0 Saddle i_ bib 5i Map 2. Aerial Photograph Feet 0 100 200 400 7 Saddle Club Site Aeii.,IpIh mop apIi e • • R Legend Saddle Club Site Soil type (Aar contours (2ft) Is anti. Iva Kral. a, Kr Map 3. Topography and Soils Lino, Lei)) Markey. Ma Rifle. Rt Sodenrille. Sos). Zimmerman, Zm8 Feet 100 200 400 8 Saddle Club Site ¶ oi15 d1141 Tolrbillairily • • EC R Legend Saddle Club Site Wetland boundaries Wetland boundaries upd at 111111111C77- 0 1 Map 4. Wetland delineation and FOR GPS points 9 UU Feet Saddle Club Site pile Plant Siiivey e • • .y1L, lue— WETLAND 3 SOIL AND VEGETATION SAMPLE LOCATION F29-35 FLAG NUMBERS F89-107 0 Rev. 1:5125/2013 include drainage ditch in NW. Rev. 2: 6/27/2013 additional wetland areas & data forms 40 10/29/12 Project 131-12 093.0960D00° W 093_094)000' W EARTH SCIENCE ASSOCIATES, INC. Eavirmametalal Ccamattb. g Specislists I I 37741 tkoadAvasse Nal"'"h. U4S5)34 earthscienceassociates.com TtglAtes fi1S744110 0 WAL n'01 :30QQ_ mu 400 093.092p000° Figure 2 Site Diagram SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. TITLE SHEET, NOTES & LEGEND LINO LAKES, MN GENERAL NOTES THE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS CONCERNING TYPE AND LOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES IS NOT GUARANTEED TO BE ACCURATE OR ALL INCLUSIVE. THE CONTRACTOR 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING HIS OWN DETERMINATION AS TO TYPE AND LOCATION OF UTIUTIES AS NECESSARY TO AVOID DAMAGE TO THESE UTUTIES. CALL '811' FOR EXISTING UTLITIES LOCATIONS PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATIONS. INSTALLATIONS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CITY STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAIL PLATES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY CITY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT A MINIMUM OF 24 HOURS PRIOR TO THE INTERRUPTION OF ANY SEWER OR WATER SERVICES TO EXISTING HOMES OR BUSINESSES. STORAGE OF MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED 014 PUBUC STREETS OR WITHIN PUBUC RIGHT -OF -WAY. NOTIFY CITY A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. WATER MAIN NOTES EXISTING WATER MAIN LOCATION AND 512E SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO ANY INSTALLATIONS. PROVIDE PIPE INSULATION WHERE SEWER (SANITARY OR STORM) CROSSES WITHIN 18' OF WATER MAIN. PROPOSED WATER MAIN SHALL BE DIP CLASS 52. PROPOSED WATER SERVICE PIPE SHALL BE 1" COPPER TYPE K. MECHANICAL JOINTS SHALL BE USED FOR WATER MAIN PIPES 4• IN DIAMETER AND LARGER. RUBBER GASKETS SHALL CONFORM TO *WWA C111 (ANSI 421.11). MAINTAIN MINIMUM 7.5 -FT COVER TO TOP OF ALL WATER MAIN PIPE. SANITARY SEWER NOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LOCATION. SIZE. AND ELEVATION SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO ANY INSTALLATIONS. PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER SERVICES SHALL BE 4- PVC SDR 26. STORM SEWER NOTES FIELD VERIFY SIZE, ELEVATION, AND LOCATION OF EXISTING STORM SEWER AND NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO ANY INSTALLATIONS. WHEN CALLED OUT AS PIPE, STORM SEWER SHALL BE REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE (RCP) ANSI C76 WITH R -4 GASKETS OR, IF ALLOWED BY CITY, HOPE PIPE MAY BE USED. (SEE PLAN FOR LOCATIONS WHERE RCP IS REQUIRED.) HDPE PIPE SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF AASHTO *294. TYPE 5 WITH WATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS. USE SAND /GRANULAR MATERIAL FOR BACKFIWNG AND COMPACTION OF HDPE/PVC PIPE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF A0119 2321. STORM SEWER LENGTHS INCLUDE THE LAYING LENGTH OF THE FLARED -END SECTION. LAYING LENGTH OF APRON TO BE DEDUCTED FROM PAYMENT LENGTH OF PIPE. STORM SEWER PIPES TO BE JOINED TO THE CATCH BASIN MANHOLES W/ APPROVED RESIDENT RUBBER JOINTS TO MAKE THEM GASTIGHT OR WATERTIGHT. CEMENT MORTAR JOINTS ARE PERMITTED ONLY FOR REPAIRS AND CONNECTIONS OF EXISTING UNES CONSTRUCTED WITH SUCH JOINTS. CURB & BITUMINOUS NOTES REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF EXISTING STREET MATERIALS AS REWIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION IS CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL SAW -CUT EXISTING BITUMINOUS AND CONCRETE CURB TO PROVIDE BUTT -JOINT. RESTORE DISTURBED STREET TO EXISTING OR BETTER SECTION. BACKFIWNG OF CURB IS INCIDENTAL TO CURB INSTALLATION. FOUR INCHES 06 CLASS 5 UNDER CURB 15 INCIDENTAL TO CURB INSTALLATION. CURB ENDS SHALL TERMINATE 18 A THREE -FOOT BEAVER TAIL VICINITY MAP LEGEND 928__. .SP" EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRIC EXISTING UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE EXISTNG UNDERGROUND CABLE EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL EXISTING ELECTRICAL PEDESTAL EXISTING CABLE PEDESTAL EXISTING UTILITY POLE EXISTNG LIGHT POLE EXISTING STORM SEWER EXISTNG WATER MAIN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EXISTING STORM MANHOLE EXISTING FLARED -END SECTION EXISTING GATE VALVE EXISTING HYDRANT EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE EXISTING CONTOUR EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION EXISTING FENCE DEUNEATED WETLAND EDGE OETMEAIKN 81 /MTH SON. ssmAlES MCY M,10-:11-1: 8440 TEST PITS/BORINGS PERFORMED BY NORM. TEOMMOMES Mt. SHEET INDEX �)- PROPOSED WATER PIPE PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER PIPE PROPOSED STORM SEWER PIPE PROPOSED DRAINTLE AND CLEAN -OUT ® PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE ❑ PROPOSED CATCH BASIN A PROPOSED FLARED -END SECTION A, PROPOSED GATE VALVE PROPOSED HYDRANT PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE PROPOSED CONTOUR -928 - -930- X920.60 I4',' '41 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION OR ENORMOUS SURFACE. MUM SURFACE OTNRNSE INDISMSER PROPOSED SILT FENCE PROPOSED DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE PROPOSED RIP -RAP WETLAND FILL (SEE SHEET LT.1 FOR O RIVICAIWN OF FN. AREAS) WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREA (SEE NM. RERAO]EMT Rut FOR COMM oPROPOSED INLET PROTECTION CO TITLE SHEET, NOTES & LEGEND 01 -1 GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL PLAN C1 -2 GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL PLAN C2 -1 UTILITY PLAN C2 -2 UTILITY PLAN 03 DETAILS 04 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS /CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PRELIMINARY PLAT TREE PRESERVATION PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN s11 Know what's below. Call before you dig. 2 4 Vii• �1 1 I ' 2 0 6 QV «OSG LEP % ! PAW P 7r 7 itil 1- 7 ILL=- f I X7.:.7 T --. \��. " \F\ EL :.".0..... ).--..... r..r I:il 1/ 10UTL)T C"; I OUTLET .. iI o / 1 I I 1 1 1/ p // / /_ 1 1 / / 1 \ 1 ( I \ 1 1 / \` /J ) I \ / / / BL �f 7 !BLOC 2 3 • L _ TITLE SHEET, NOTES & LEGEND SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. DRAWN BY: C.M. CHCKD BY: DESIGN BY: 8120.1.140. 131414 ORIGINAL DATE OCTOBER 14, 2013 REVISION DESCRIPTION SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. PREPARED FOR: DUPONT HOLDINGS, LLC 114t% SITE PLANNING 8 ENGINEERING PLOWE ENGINEERING. INC. 6776 LAKE DRIVE SUITE 110 LINO RAKES. MN 55014 PHONE: (851)361 -8210 FAX: (851) 361 -8701 NORTH 0 50 100 1 INCH =100 FEET CO WETLAND FILL LOCATION WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREA NO. AREA (SF) AREA NO. AREA SF) 8/16/2013 AREA NO. AREA 0IMEMMEM=i1=11 PIT 1 A 8.853 892.57 892.53 892.92 PIT 2 B 35,137 �®� 893.84 � PIT 3 C 68.796 895.40 895.40 895.78 PIT 4 896.71 896.38 ©MIESM®IIIKEIME 896.21 896.40 PIT 5 894.74 893.99 �MILEEM®® 893.53 893.98 PIT 6 893.39 893.05 7 284 14 1,454 892.01 891.55 891.51 8 191 15 2,473 889.54 889.54 889.46 9 7,295 893.75 892.09 891.84 891.92 892.40 PIT 10 892.77 892.15 892.19 892.27 892.34 TH 1 893.99 TOTAL 60,249 891.28 TOTAL 112,786 GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1) PRIOR TO ANY GRADING OPERATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED - COORDINATE 01TH OWNER) AND PERIMETER SILT FENCE AS SHOWN ON PUN. (CONTACT CITY TO INSPECT ER0909 CONTROL MEASURES PRIOR TO GRADING OPERATIONS. IF NECESSARY.) ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE MAY BE NECESSARY IF LOCAL CONDITIONS REQUIRE. 2) THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM SITE GRADING ON AN AREA -BY -AREA BASIS TO MINIMIZE UNSTABILJ2ED AREAS. AS EACH AREA I5 COMPLETED. ALL EXPOSED SOILS MUST HAVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL PROTECTOR OR PERMANENT COVER WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS. 3) SEE SHEET 04, STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES AND SITE SEQUENCING. Zoned R -1 28-31-22-31-0011 Owner: Gary & SHOrlO Foster Arm e LOT N0. DRAINAGE & UTDTY EASEMENT SURFACE DRAINAGE AT EARHOF HWSEE I I \ } PROPERTY LINE RECOMMENDED HOUSE TYPE S.EW.O. - SPOT -ENTRY wALK -COT W.O. - 5POT ENTRY PROPOSED ELEVATKIN AT GARAGE DOOR (FRONT) R/W 51REE TYPICAL LOT LAYOUT WE'OAIID F4L /2 FE- xrw 1645CATE5 PROPOSED LOWEST FLOOR ELEV. INDICATES DROPPED GARAGE SUGGESTED GARAGE LOCATOR Zoned R -1 esy X11 ., 28- 31 -22 -31 0028 f0440 /4 a®°,e,° ¢ en� .'Jess & Rebecca Roaring \� as114,, --< ® u 0 xM 992 Aspen Lone / xwew.n eww ev3n / [wx \� _ [soy_ %�. ew # / eld 695 CO sear WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS LOCATION WATER ELEVATION READINGS 8/9/13 8/16/2013 8/23/2013 9/13/2013 AVERAGE PIT 1 893.37 893.24 892.57 892.53 892.92 PIT 2 895.30 894.26 893.89 893.84 894.32 PIT 3 896.57 895.74 895.40 895.40 895.78 PIT 4 896.71 896.38 896.30 896.21 896.40 PIT 5 894.74 893.99 893.65 893.53 893.98 PIT 6 893.39 893.05 892.30 892.18 892.73 PIT 7 892.01 891.55 891.51 891.34 891.60 PIT 8 889.83 889.54 889.54 889.46 889.59 PIT 9 893.75 892.09 891.84 891.92 892.40 PIT 10 892.77 892.15 892.19 892.27 892.34 TH 1 893.99 893.45 892.70 891.28 892.49 TN 2 893.46 893.12 892.62 891.87 892.55 TH 3 893.54 893.04 892.12 890.96 892.09 18 4 892.72 892.09 891.34 889.93 891.10 10 5 890.50 889.96 889.50 888.33 890.00 ` • Zoned R-1 _ , 28- 31- 22- 31 -0028w Zoned R -1 .P'7„,,Owner Susan M. Schrnitz 998 Asp L e�.sM Revocoble Trust 08* 41 -'4[ 0QWS xt xwnea Hsoom xH 50 UN MO ?RS esAse EDNA AO.' xr- TILL 342W [M�Kk kP59 �1, Aga s s�sjrt�,¢mx -nwi �/ GAR DROP 1 FT I :!r;:. W0. APPRO PHASE t GRADING L 8 13 = il REPLACEMENT PLAII W BEFAI (TIP) OAS Know what's below. CBII before you dig. BLO 11TC NAT 7.28 / 10 X t X I xtrs' 91r. e8.16 ¢ xa 0 esee. N.07 3eMesm xs • °a rkElb 19 ruip MOO PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE, & EROSION CONTROL PLAN SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. DRAWN BY C.M. CHCKD BY: C.W.P. DESIGN 8Y: C.W.P. PROD. NO. 13 -1414 ORIGINAL DATE OCTOBER 14, 2013 REVISION DESCRIPTION f 5 SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. ai 3 Q 2 0O ¢U O Z >O ZO PREPARED FOR' DUPONT HOLDINGS, LLC %°,0 SITE PLANNING &ENGINEERING PLOWE ENGINEERING, INC. 6716 DRIVE SUITE 110 110 LINO LANES. MN 55014 PHONE;(651)361 -8210 FAX (851) 361 -8701 NORTH D 25 50 11NCH= 50 FEET C1 -1 1 \ ih. �/ GAR DROP 1 FT I :!r;:. W0. APPRO PHASE t GRADING L 8 13 = il REPLACEMENT PLAII W BEFAI (TIP) OAS Know what's below. CBII before you dig. BLO 11TC NAT 7.28 / 10 X t X I xtrs' 91r. e8.16 ¢ xa 0 esee. N.07 3eMesm xs • °a rkElb 19 ruip MOO PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE, & EROSION CONTROL PLAN SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. DRAWN BY C.M. CHCKD BY: C.W.P. DESIGN 8Y: C.W.P. PROD. NO. 13 -1414 ORIGINAL DATE OCTOBER 14, 2013 REVISION DESCRIPTION f 5 SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. ai 3 Q 2 0O ¢U O Z >O ZO PREPARED FOR' DUPONT HOLDINGS, LLC %°,0 SITE PLANNING &ENGINEERING PLOWE ENGINEERING, INC. 6716 DRIVE SUITE 110 110 LINO LANES. MN 55014 PHONE;(651)361 -8210 FAX (851) 361 -8701 NORTH D 25 50 11NCH= 50 FEET C1 -1 WETLAND FILL LOCATION WETLAND ENHANCEMENT AREA NO. AREA (SF) AREA NO. AREA (SF) AVERAGE AREA NO. AREA 1 3,342 10 539 PIT 2 A 8.853 2 773 11 2,296 896.57 B 35.137 3 5,689 11A 822 896.38 C 68,796 4 12,949 12 226 893.65 893.53 893.98 5 11,021 13 427 892.18 892.73 PIT 7 6 10,239 13A 229 891.60 PIT 8 889.83 7 284 14 1,454 PIT 9 893.75 892.09 8 191 15 2,473 892.77 892.15 892.19 9 7,295 TH 1 893.99 893.45 892.70 891.28 892.49 TH 2 893.46 893.12 892.62 891.87 892.55 TOTAL 60,249 TOTAL 112,786 SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE 5E 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 SECTION 28, TWP. 31, ROE. 22 tap GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1) PRIOR TO ANY GRADING OPERATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE (100911ON5 TO BE DETERMINED - COORDINATE YAM OWNER) AND PERIMETER SILT FENCE AS SHOW ON PLAN. (CONTACT CITY TO INSPECT EROSION CONTROL MEASURES PRIOR TO GRADING OPERATIONS, IF NECESSARY.) ADDITIONAL SILT FENCE MAY BE NECESSARY IF LOCAL CONDITIONS REQUIRE. 2) THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM SITE GRADING ON AN AREA -8Y -AREA BASIS TO MINIMIZE UNSTABILIZED AREAS. AS EACH AREA IS COMPLETED, ALL EXPOSED SOILS MUST HAVE TEMPORARY ER0510N CONTROL PROTECTION OR PERMANENT COVER WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS. 3) SEE SHEET 04, STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) FOR ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL NOTES AND SITE SEQUENCING. LOT N0. DRAINAGE k URUTY EASEMENT SURFACE DRAINAGE FINISHED GRADE PROPERTY LINE AT REAR OF HOUSE I RECOMMENDED HOUSE TYPE 5.0.1.0. - SPUT -ENTRY WALX -OUT W.O. - SPUT ENTRY PROPOSED ELEVARCN AT GARAGE DOOR (FRONT) L STREET TYPICAL LOT LAYOUT MDICATES PROPOSED LOWEST FLOOR ELEV. INDICATES DROPPED GARAGE SUGGESTED GARAGE LOCATION WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS LOCATION WATER ELEVATION READINGS 8/9/13 8/16/2013 8/23/2013 9/13/2013 AVERAGE PIT 1 893.37 893.24 892.57 892.53 892.92 PIT 2 895.30 894.26 893.89 893.84 894.32 PIT 3 896.57 895.74 895.40 895.40 895.78 PIT 4 896.71 896.38 896.30 896.21 896.40 PIT 5 894.74 893.99 893.65 893.53 893.98 PIT 6 893.39 893.05 892.30 892.18 892.73 PIT 7 892.01 891.55 891.51 891.34 891.60 PIT 8 889.83 889.54 889.54 889.46 889.59 PIT 9 893.75 892.09 891.84 891.92 892.40 PIT 10 892.77 892.15 892.19 892.27 892.34 TH 1 893.99 893.45 892.70 891.28 892.49 TH 2 893.46 893.12 892.62 891.87 892.55 19 3 893.54 893.04 892.12 890.96 892.09 111 4 892.72 892.09 891.34 689.93 891.10 10 5 890.50 889.96 889.50 888.33 890.00 0 0'L ftx909 91 R9770 424‘'4 4° .9�QS ENHANCEMENT B- 35.137S9 (SEE YETMO T PLAN FOR DET/JLS) efc Zoned ` UD (Ora. 26 -04) Know what's below. Call before you dig. 801LAND DIHAN0EMENT AREA C - 68.976 SF (SE MERINO REPLA9EIENT RAN FOR COWLS) G aEP 000 .0. RJ PS\ON P CON eR °e°Sto x,. xr. If-v.0W n3 otism BLOCK' 5 15-01 880E 04152ROW (DES, 893.25). a 131POio Oil 191 'reel % b MONDE INLET SEGMENT CONTROL en, C° 449 FOR STORM SE1(R 80015 WTI. 24 �Sr,, (OURS OF S1RUCTIIRE INSTALLATION C .Nita T l7i °6 41,p,„ q 1E'RM0 F91 415 2.473 SF air x121' 471" env xr- 0. ,.r!'aFeWV.x IA1,662.0 (7 Per RC.) P 040 FEET nOPM E FEET 57 7 eE, xre Zoned PUD (Ord. 26 -04) PET Zoned Rurol WITNESS CORNER, SECTION 33, TWP. 31, RGE 22 - -- PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE, & EROSION CONTROL PLAN SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. DRAWN BY C.M. CNCKD BY: DESIGN BY: PROJ. NO. 13 -1414 ORIGINAL DATE OCTOBER 14, 2013 00 0 SADDLE CLUB P.U.D. z 0 l3z a PREPARED FOR DUPONT HOLDINGS, LLC t4#,B SITE PLANNING 8 ENGINEERING PLOWE ENGINEERING, INC. 6776 LAKE DRIVE SUITE 110 LINO LAKES. MN 55014 PHONE: (651)361.8210 FAX (651)361-8701 NORTH 0� 25 50 1 INCH 9 50 FEET 01-2 • -of- SADDLE CLUB PUD -for-- DuPont Holdings LLC 1000 County Road E. West Suite 150 Shoreview, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 483 -558 TOTAL BOUNDARY AREA TOTAL UPLAND AREA TOTAL WETLAND AREA TOTAL R/W AREA PROPOSED PUD LOTS PUD LOTS AREA PROPOSED OUTLOTS TOTAL OUTLOT AREA AVERAGE LOT SIZE DENSITY = 1,733,617 S.F. (39.80 ACRES) = 1,329.457 S.F. (30.52 ACRES) [778] = 404,160 S.F. (9.28 ACRES) [238] = 189,207 S.F. (4.34 ACRES) [118] = 55 LOTS = 999,625 S.F. (22.95 ACRES) [588] = 4 (TO BE DEEDED TO THE CITY) = 544.785 S.F. (12.51 ACRES) [318] = 18.175 S.F. (0.50 ACRES) = 1.38 LOTS PER ACRE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 80 FT MINIMUM LOT DEPTH 135 FT MINIMUM LOT SIZE 10.800 S.F. FRONT YARD SETBACK 25 FEET REAR YARD SETBACK 25 FEET SIDE YARD GARAGE SETBACK 5 FEET SIDE YARD HOUSE SETBACK 10 FEET • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND AS LABELED O DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET, MARKED RLS# 25341 iitr DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT DENOTES HYDRANT •n, DENOTES POWER POLE u.• DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION M DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL ® DENOTES CABLE PEDESTAL E DENOTES ELECTRICAL BOX c' DENOTES GUY WIRE 4 DENOTES STORM SEWER APRON dta DENOTES WET LAND TO REMAIN -. —r— DENOTES FENCE •• .......... DENOTES EXISTING 2 FOOT CONT DENOTES BRUSH LINE DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE DENOTES TREE ELEVATION & TREE NUMBER DENOTES PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT - 66 FOOT PUBLIC R/W / 1i _ EASEMENT BY PRESCRIPTION A /o 96090520 R/W EASEMENT DEDICATED TO 102 PUBLIC NA SEPERATE OOC. TO BE /_ COORDINATED BY DEVELOPER 26- 31 -22 -31 -0011 Owner. Gary & Shade Foster 862 CIA Birch 5t DENOTES PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT NOTES - Site Address is 1403 Birch Street, Lino Lakes, MN. - Pin. No. 28- 31 -22 -34 -0001 - Fee owner is First Western Bank & Trust. o Minnesota Corporation. - Field survey was completed by E.G. Rod and Sons, Inc. on 4/19/2013 - Bearings shown ore on an assumed datum. - Benchmark: TNH in the plat of FOXBOROUGH. Hydrant located at the SE corner of Red Fox Road and Fox Road. Elevation is 904.61 feet. - Wetland shown was delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. on 10/29/12. - Property falls within 2 FDA Flood Zones: - Zone A: Area of 100yr flooding. Bose flood elevation to be determined. Zone C: Area of minimal flooding. DENOTES CONSERVATION AREA AND /OR AREA BELOW THE OHW SUBTRACTED FROM THE GROSS AREA Zoned R -1 -; 28- 31' -22 -31 -0026 , \, Oener.%Jesw & Rebecca Roaring_._ \i 1 Zoned R -1 E... I 2: Susan IA. Schmitz Owner. Susan N. Schmitz Revxable Trust �' - 996 Aspen Lane, Zoned R -1 26- 31 -22 -42 -0026 .4 _ Owner. Mork D & KMIy B Farr e' 6503 Killdeer Dr 236.9 UTILITY EASEMENT .........8 i r__ BLOCK, • VICINITY MAP PART OF SEC. 28, TWP. 31, RNG. 22 ........................ 1--• —.... Ian CROSS - 13.5/9 SF• 13 NELrl3sie sr, • i, IA 105.0 i 05.0 8500 36.4 42.7 I I� I I I � I I a 5. - -r b' 6 is 7 b 8 }'-�pROSS- .12.916 SF. 680$5..11,475 S.F. 1 11,475 Si. ' "NEY�13,916 SF. 1,4 NET =11.473 Si. r 1ET- 11.475 S.F. r fA04- 15,157 SI NET - 75.151 S.F. —� 1 1 I r� \ I I I _ I I . I / L eo / 95.1 •6 b 05.0 _ ' • 14475 S.F. yo • I ` \. l.. •ry/ GROSS- 1.28 ?. '. \ — _.. 1' NET- 14.262,- ,, 1 S.F. / : I - 11 :.' 1 SF. /i-. �,... 43 \$ 10 _ \ 1• \ t `h•.0 .i I 1.1._._. NET- 4792 . o S \ J � ,- / (. ° t 19,- •5 \ / �� .‘� A -10882 S. 44?' '4•�•�•� CC•4' •••4' „,,, 4 4 . • DRAINAGE AND UTIUTY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: f I I (NOT TO SCALE) BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING SIDE LOT LINES AND 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING STREET LINES AND REAR LOT UNES, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAT. CielG. RUN & SONS, INC. . 19,1 Professional Land Surveyors www.egud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361 -8200 Fax(651)361 -8701 S� \rud \ CAD \12proj \12589 \125B9PRELIM- PLAT.dwg 10/14/2013 1'3913 PM CDT (PER SCHEDULE A OF ALL AMERICAN COMMERCIAL TITLE, INC. ISSUING AGENTS FOR OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT NO. 101286) Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota. together with on easement for roadway purposes over the Northerly 60 feet of the Easterly 60 feet of the East 330 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, as contained in Document No. 144111. EXISTING GUIDANCE: LOW DENSITY SEWERED RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED GUIDANCE NO CHANGE EXISTING: R -1 AND RURAL PROPOSED: PUD - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. DA EL W. OBERMILLER �^ Dote: 00/14/13 License No. 25341 105.0 i 05.0 8500 36.4 42.7 I I� I I I � I I a 5. - -r b' 6 is 7 b 8 }'-�pROSS- .12.916 SF. 680$5..11,475 S.F. 1 11,475 Si. ' "NEY�13,916 SF. 1,4 NET =11.473 Si. r 1ET- 11.475 S.F. r fA04- 15,157 SI NET - 75.151 S.F. —� 1 1 I r� \ I I I _ I I . I / L eo / 95.1 •6 b 05.0 _ ' • 14475 S.F. yo • I ` \. l.. •ry/ GROSS- 1.28 ?. '. \ — _.. 1' NET- 14.262,- ,, 1 S.F. / : I - 11 :.' 1 SF. /i-. �,... 43 \$ 10 _ \ 1• \ t `h•.0 .i I 1.1._._. NET- 4792 . o S \ J � ,- / (. ° t 19,- •5 \ / �� .‘� A -10882 S. 44?' '4•�•�•� CC•4' •••4' „,,, 4 4 . • DRAINAGE AND UTIUTY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS: f I I (NOT TO SCALE) BEING 5 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING SIDE LOT LINES AND 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND ADJOINING STREET LINES AND REAR LOT UNES, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THIS PLAT. CielG. RUN & SONS, INC. . 19,1 Professional Land Surveyors www.egud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361 -8200 Fax(651)361 -8701 S� \rud \ CAD \12proj \12589 \125B9PRELIM- PLAT.dwg 10/14/2013 1'3913 PM CDT (PER SCHEDULE A OF ALL AMERICAN COMMERCIAL TITLE, INC. ISSUING AGENTS FOR OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT NO. 101286) Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota. together with on easement for roadway purposes over the Northerly 60 feet of the Easterly 60 feet of the East 330 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, as contained in Document No. 144111. EXISTING GUIDANCE: LOW DENSITY SEWERED RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED GUIDANCE NO CHANGE EXISTING: R -1 AND RURAL PROPOSED: PUD - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. DA EL W. OBERMILLER �^ Dote: 00/14/13 License No. 25341 PRELIMINARY PLAT • -of- SADDLE CLUB PUD -for- DuPont Holdings LLC 1000 County Road E. West Suite 150 Shoreview, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 483 -558 • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT 4 FOUND AS LABELED AL O DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET, MARKED RLS# 25341 O. DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT DENOTES HYDRANT •n, DENOTES POWER POLE • • DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION CD DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL • DENOTES CABLE PEDESTAL E DENOTES ELECTRICAL BOX a� DENOTES GUY WIRE DENOTES STORM SEWER APRON DENOTES WET LAND TO REMAIN DENOTES FENCE DENOTES EXISTING 2 FOOT CONTOURS DENOTES BRUSH LINE DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE DENOTES TREE ELEVATION & TREE NUMBER DENOTES PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT DENOTES CONSERVATION AREA AND /OR AREA BELOW THE OHW SUBTRACTED FROM THE GROSS AREA Site Address is 1403 Birch Street, Lino Lakes, MN. Pin. No. 26- 31 -22 -34 -0001 Fee owner is First Western Bonk & Trust. a Minnesota Corporation. Field survey was completed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. on 4/19/2013 Bearings shown are on on assumed datum. Benchmark: TNH in the plot of FOXBOROUGH. Hydrant located at the SE corner of Red Fox Road and Fox Road. Elevation is 904.61 feet. Wetland shown was delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. on 10/29/12. Property falls within 2 FEMA Flood Zones: — Zone A: Area of 100yr flooding. Base flood elevation to be determined. — Zone 0: Area of minimal flooding. >\ NET -10.023 S.F. / ae GROSS - 12,728 S.F. / • == -PROPOSED R/W EASEMENT DEDICATED TO THE PUBUC NA SEPERATE DOC. TO BE COORDINATED BY DEVELOPER I GROSS- 19,648 S.F. I NET- 11,794 0.2. SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 - - - -- SECD3N 28. TWP. 31. RGE. 22 33- 31 -22 -21 -0004 'I FOXBOROUGH HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. Unassigned fit_ �" Zoned Rural 33- 31 -22 -21 -0003 Owner. Encompass Digital Media LLC 6221 Holly Drive N WITNESS CORNER. SECDON 33. TWP. 31. RGE 22 Amy M & Rondo! R Gruczyk 886 Fos Road ,1L E. G. RUD sr SONS, INC. Est'"? Professional Land Surveyors www.egud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361 -8200 Fax (651) 361 -8701 S : \rud\ CAD \12proj \12589 \12589PRELIM- PLAT.dwg 10/14/2013 139.13 PM CDT I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. DANIEL W OBERMILLER r 4 1 7 m- r PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE/ PLANTINC PLAN -of-- SADDLE CLUB PUD -for-- DuPont Holdings LLC 1000 County Road E. West Suite 150 Shoreview, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 483 -558 ROADWAY EASEMENT_...„ PER DOC. N0.144111 rcu 1 1 r -- 1 1 I 1 2 Q W W F ti NORTH r r - 2 r 3 °'. L • 0 • ssm m LEGEND DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND AS LABELED DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET, MARKED RLS# 25341 DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT DENOTES HYDRANT DENOTES POWER POLE DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL DENOTES CABLE PEDESTAL DENOTES ELECTRICAL BOX DENOTES GUY WIRE 4 DENOTES STORM SEWER APRON dk DENOTES WET LAND TO REMAIN —+ — +— DENOTES FENCE DENOTES EXISTING 2 FOOT CONTOURS DENOTES BRUSH LINE > DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER • DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE 0 DENOTES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED TREE GRAPHIC SCALE 25 50 ILO ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 50 i0 NOTES - Site Address is 1403 Birch Street, Lino Lakes, MN. - Pin. No. 28- 31 -22 -34 -0001 - Field survey was completed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. on 4/19/2013 - Bearings shown ore on an assumed datum. - Benchmark: TNH in the plot of FOXBOROUGH. Hydrant located of the SE corner of Red Fox Road and Fox Road. Elevation is 904.61 feet. - Wetland shown was delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. on 10/29/12. r UN • BLOCK 5 it / 6 re- - 5 \\ t____ F5.055 L J IQ i 6 —� NM L J re l 7 No. L J r - - - - -- 8 L �MOj----% 4 BLOC 9 8 10 • f5Tp. E.G. RUD a SONS, INC. EST.1911 Professional Land Surveyors www.egud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361 -8200 Fax (651) 361 -8701 S� \rud \ CAD \12proj \12589 \12589PRELIM - PLAT.dwg 1D/14/2013 D39L3 PM CDT r`. 1 / 13 dr. EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (PER SCHEDULE A OF ALL AMERICAN COMMERCIAL TITLE, INC. ISSUING AGENTS FOR OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT N0. 101286) Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, together with an easement for roadway purposes over the Northerly 60 feet of the Easterly 60 feet of the East 330 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, as contained in Document No. 144111. SEE SHEET 7 OF 9 SHEETS LANDSCAPING NOTES - CITY TO DETERMINE LOCATION AND SPECIES OF TREE. - 1 TREE PER LOT 2 TREES PER CORNER LOT ARE REQUIRED. ORANN 80: .EN JOB NO 12589PP IDATE: 70/ 4/13 CHECK BY: dwo SCANNED ❑ 2 N0. DATE DESCRIPTION BY SHEET 6 OF 9 SHEETS 12589PP FRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE/ PLANTING PLAN -of- SADDLE CLUB PUD -for-- DuPont Holdings LLC 1000 County Road E. West Suite 150 Shoreview, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 483 -558 O /I\ NORTH LEGEND • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND AS LABELED o DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET, MARKED RLS/ 25341 DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT DENOTES HYDRANT 'Lb DENOTES POWER POLE r 50005 DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION ID DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL in DENOTES CABLE PEDESTAL M DENOTES ELECTRICAL BOX c DENOTES GUY WIRE SEE SHEET 6 OF 9 SHEETS 14 OCK 4 DENOTES STORM SEWER APRON AL DENOTES WET LAND TO REMAIN DENOTES FENCE _ ' DENOTES EXISTING 2 FOOT CONTOURS DENOTES BRUSH LINE DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE DENOTES TREE ELEVATION & TREE NUMBER DENOTES APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED TREE NOTES - Site Address is 1403 Birch Street, Lino Lakes, MN. - Pin. No. 28- 31 -22 -34 -0001 - Field survey was completed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. on 4/19/2013 - Bearings shown ore on on assumed datum. - Benchmark: TNH in the plat of FOXBOROUGH. Hydrant located of the 5E corner of Red Fox Road and Fox Road. Elevation is 904.61 feet. - Wetland shown was delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. on 10/29/12. • F 2 5 9 -1 ...L 2 L J C L J F ' d‘ C, \ONPR�P � OV( SERJ pt A. A. lk T 2 BLOCK 3 J r 1 AIL ore° (op cotis��B 477/04, 2 E.G. RUD a SONS, INC. EsT.T9n Professional Land Surveyors www.eg ud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361 -8200 Fax(651)361 -8701 S' \rud \ CAD \12proj \12589 \12589PRELIM- PLAT.tlwg 10/14/2013 1:39:13 PM CDT EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (PER SCHEDULE A OF ALL AMERICAN COMMERCIAL TITLE, INC. ISSUING AGENTS FCR OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT NO. 101286) Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, together with on easement for roadway purposes over the Northerly 60 feet of the Easterly 60 feet of the East 330 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, as contained in Document No. 144111. GRAPHIC SCALE 25 50 ( IN FEET ) I Inch = 50 ft. F LANDSCAPING NOTES - CITY TO DETERMINE LOCATION AND SPECIES OF TREE. - 1 TREE PER LOT 2 TREES PER CORNER LOT ARE REQUIRED. DRAW 95 JEN JOB Na 12589PP 1007E: 10/ 4/13 CHECK BC deo SCANNED Ei 2 NO. DATE DESCRIPTION BY SHEET 7 OF 9 SHEETS 12589PP PRELIMINAHY TREE INVENTORY AND TREE REMOVAL PLAN -of- SADDLE CLUB PUD -for- DuPont Holdings LLC 1000 County Road E. West Suite 150 Shoreview, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 483 -558 VICINITY MAP PART OF SEC. 28, TWP. 31, RNG. 22 ANOKA COUNTY, Mr fs.ESOTA (NO SCALD TREE REMOVAL NOTES - City to determine quantity and species of trees to be replaced. - Tree replacement size is to be 2 ". NORTH LEGEND • DENOTES IRON MONUMENT —..— DENOTES FOUND AS LABELED O DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET. MARKED RLS# 25341 DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT DENOTES HYDRANT w DENOTES POWER POLE • • DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION on DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL ® DENOTES CABLE PEDESTAL m DENOTES ELECTRICAL BOX o- DENOTES GUY WIRE 4 DENOTES STORM SEWER APRON Alk DENOTES WET LAND FENCE _ ... DENOTES EXISTING 2 FOOT CONTOURS DENOTES BRUSH UNE DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER ow DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE MI 1 NI 1 MO DENOTES TREE ELEVATION & TREE NUMBER DENOTES PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS AND TREE REMOVAL LINE DENOTES PROPOSED WETLAND FILL AREA 1 —TREES TO BE' SAVED- 665 NOTES Site Address is 1403 Birch Street, Lino Lokes, MN. Pin. No. 28- 31 -22 -34 -0001 Field survey wos completed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. on 4/19/2013 Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. Benchmark: TNH in the plat of FOXBOROUGH. Hydront located at the SE comer of Red Fox Road and Fox Road. Elevation is 904.61 feet. Wetland shown was delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. on 10/29/12. '♦ ..a At c f" i •dal:•` W :1t E. G. ROD a SONS, INC. m.19T7 Professional Land Surveyors www.eg ud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361-8200 Fax(651)361 -8701 S \ run \ CAD \12proj \12589 \12589PRELIM- PLAT.d.g 10/14/2013 1'3943 PM CDT EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (PER SCHEDULE A OF ALL AMERICAN COMMERCIAL TITLE, INC. ISSUING AGENTS FOR OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY COMMITMENT NO. 101286) Southeast Quarter of Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Minnesota, together with an easement for roodwoy purposes over the Northerly 60 feet of the Easterly 60 feet of the East 330 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, as contained in Document No. 144111. SEE SHEET 9 OF 9 SHEETS GRAPHIC SCALE 25 50 ( IN FEET 1 inch = 50 ft. I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesota. Jam_ DANIEL W. OBERMILIER Date: 10/14/13 License No. 25341 ipw ,4REES TO A 111. • osta . .p.E SAVED Ix DRAW., B1: .EN JOB N0: 12589PP DATE: 70/14/13 CHECK BY: 4.o SCANNED 0 2 NO. DA75 DESCRIPPON BY SHEET 8 OF 9 SHEETS 12589PP PRELIMINARY TREE INVENTORY AND TREE REMOVAL PLAN -of-- SADDLE CLUB PUD -for-- DuPont Holdings LLC 1000 County Road E. West Suite 150 Shoreview, MN 55126 Phone: (651) 483 -558 TREE REMOVAL NOTES - City to determine quantity and species of trees to be replaced. - Tree replacement size is to be 2 ". CEST.rTE. G. RUD & SONS, INC. 191 Professional Land Surveyors www.eg ud.com 6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110 Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Tel. (651) 361 -8200 Fax(651) 361 -8701 S: \rud \CAD \12proj \12589 \12589PRELIM- PLAT.drg 10/14/2013 1:3913 PM COT NORTH • • w . D1 4 LEGEND DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND AS LABELED DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SET. MARKED RLS# 25341 DENOTES ANOKA COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT DENOTES HYDRANT DENOTES POWER POLE DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL DENOTES CABLE PEDESTAL DENOTES ELECTRICAL BOX DENOTES GUY WIRE DENOTES STORM SEWER APRON DENOTES WET LAND -. .— DENOTES FENCE DENOTES EXISTING 2 FOOT CONTOURS DENOTES BRUSH LINE >�- DENOTES EXISTING STORM SEWER X 0523. AS NM I MN DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE DENOTES TREE ELEVATION & TREE NUMBER DENOTES PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS AND TREE REMOVAL LINE DENOTES PROPOSED WETLAND FILL AREA SEE SHEET 8 OF 9 SHEETS OM NOTES Site Address is 1403 Birch Street, Lino Lakes, MN. Pin. No. 28- 31 -22 -34 -0001 Field survey was completed by E.G. Rud and Sons, Inc. on 4/19/2013 Bearings shown are on an assumed datum. Benchmark: TNH in the plat of FOXBOROUGH. Hydrant located at the SE corner of Red Fox Road and Fox Road. Elevotion is 904.61 feet. Wetland shown was delineated by Earth Science Associates, Inc. on 10/29/12. Mix ■04. e4 lffis 1 - f s sa t t 11,3 A TREES TO BE SAVED - - - - - -- - T ''ik 1 ! "9.11•1. 9 NM ITN aNk. fey - TREES /TO BE SAVED -------- -- A • • 8, • • GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 50 IL I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. DANIEL W OBERMILLER Dater 10/14/13 License No. 25341 ,u. 310.91 DRANK BY. .EH JOB N0: 12589PP 10,0E: 10/14/13 CHECK BY: then SCANNED ❑ 2 No DA1E DESCRIPTION BY SHEET 9 OF 9 SHEETS 12589PP AMENDMENTS TO MINNESOTA,RULES, CHAPTER 6134 (ENDANGERED, THREATENED AND SPECIAL CONCERN SPECIES) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Effective August 19, 2013 Richard Baker, Minnesota Endangered Species Coordinator (richard.baker @state.mn.us; 651- 259 -5073) Note: This document lists changes in the endangered, threatened, or special concern status of 300 species. It does not include changes in scientific names of 64 species that were not accompanied by a change in status. Notations Used E Endangered T Threatened SC Special Concern N No Status (location records maintained by DNR, in most cases) N (X) No Status, and probably extirpated from Minnesota (location records maintained by DNR, in most cases) No Status (location records not yet maintained by DNR) Change in scientific name accompanies change in status Common Name MAMMALS Moose Gray Wolf Big Brown Bat Canada Lynx Little Brown Myotis Northern Grasshopper Mouse Western Harvest Mouse Richardson's Ground Squirrel Northern Pocket Gopher BIRDS Northern Goshawk Boreal Owl Lark Sparrow Trumpeter Swan Peregrine Falcon Bald Eagle Loggerhead Shrike Horned Grebe Purple Martin Bell's Vireo Scientific Name Alces americanus Canis lupus Eptesicus fitscus Lynx canadensis Myotis lucitgus Onychomys leucogaster Reithrodontomys megalotis Spermophilus richardsonii Thomomys talpoides Accipiter gentilis Aegolius fitnereus Chondestes grammacus Cygnus buccinator Falco peregrines Haliaeetus leztcocephalzts Lanius ludoviciamts Podiceps auritus Progne subis Vireo bellii REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS Spotted Salamander Ambystoma maculatum Great Plains Toad Anaxyrus cognatus Snapping Turtle Chelydra serpentina * Ratsnake Elaphe obsolete Mudpuppy Necturus maculosus Old Status SC N N N SC N N T T SC T T N N SC SC New Status SC N SC SC SC SC SC SC T SC SC SC SC SC N E E SC SC SC SC N T SC Common Name FISH Skipjack Herring * Crystal Darter American Eel Redside Dace Nipigon Cisco Lake Chub * Gravel Chub Bluntnose Darter Plains Topminnow Mississippi Silvery Minnow Black Buffalo Warmouth Northern Longear Sunfish Redfin Shiner Black Redhorse * Pallid Shiner Pugnose Shiner Slender Madtom Suckermouth Minnow Flathead Chub Pygmy Whitefish MOLLUSKS Flat Floater Spectaclecase Purple Wartyback Eastern Elliptio Spike Snuffbox Rogers' Snaggletooth Snail Fluted -shell Pondmussel Washboard Minnesota Pleistocene Ambersnail Iowa Pleistocene Ambersnail Hickorynut Eastern Flat -whorl Snail *Round Pigtoe Wartyback Salamander Mussel Black Striate Snail Pistolgrip Fawnsfoot Midwest Pleistocene Vertigo Variable Pleistocene Vertigo Dull Gloss JUMPING SPIDERS A Species ofJumping Spider A Species ofJumping Spider A Species of Jumping Spider A Species of Jumping Spider A Species of Jumping Spider Scientific Name Alosa chrysochloris Ammocrypta asprella Anguilla rostrata Clinostomus elongatus Coregonus nipigon Couesius plunzbeus Erinzystax x punctata Etheostoma chlorosoma Fundulus sciadicus Hybognathus nuchalis Ictiobus niger Lepomis gulosus Lepomis peltastes Lythrurus umbratilis Moxostoma duquesnei Notropis amnis Notropis anogenus Noturus exilis Phenacobius mirabilis Platygobio gracilis Prosopium coulterii Anodonta suborbiculata Cumberlandia monodonta Cyclonaias tuberculata Elliptio complanata Elliptio dilatata Epioblasma triquetra Gastrocopta rogersensis Lasmigona costata Ligumia subrostrata Megalonaias nervosa Novisuccinea n. sp. Minnesota A Novisuccinea n. sp. Minnesota B Obovaria olivaria Planogyra asteriscus Pleurobema coccineum Ouadrula nodulata Simpsonaias ambigua Striaturaferrea Tritogonia verrucosa Truncilla donacifornzis Vertigo hubrichti hubrichti Vertigo hubrichti variabilis n. subsp. Zonitoides limatulus Habronattus calcaratus maddisoni Habronattus viridipes Marpissa formosa Marpissa grata Tutelina formicaria Old Status SC SC N SC N SC SC N SC SC SC T T SC T SC T T E SC T E T T E T SC SC Page 2 New Status E E SC SC SC SC T SC T SC T SC SC SC SC E T E SC SC SC Sc E E SC T E SC T T E N N N SC SC T E SC E T N N SC Sc SC SC N T • • • • • Common Name BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS Abbreviated Underwing Whitney's Underwing Dakota Skipper Ottoe Skipper * Poweshiek Skipperling Leadplant Flower Moth CADDISFLIES A Species of Northern Caddisfly * A Species of Northern Caddisfly A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly Vertrees's Ceraclean Caddisfly Headwaters Chilostigman Caddisfly A Species of Caddisfly A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Northern Caddisfly A Species of Caddisfly A Species of Northern Caddisfly A Species of Northern Caddisfly A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Netspinning Caddisfly A Species of Tube Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Tube Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Saddle Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Saddle Casemaker Caddisfly A Species of Caddisfly A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly TIGER BEETLES Laurentian Tiger Beetle Hairy- necked Tiger Beetle LEAFHOPPERS Hill Prairie Shovelhead Leafhopper Caped Leafhopper DRAGONFLIES Zig7ng Darner Subarctic Darner Ocellated Darner Pygmy Snaketail St. Croix Snaketail Quebec Emerald Forcipate Emerald Scientific Name Catocala abbreviatella Catocala whitneyi Hesperia dacotae Hesperia ottoe Oarisma powesheik Schinia lucens Anabolia ozburni Asynarchus rossi Ceraclea brevis Ceraclea vertr•eesi Chilostigma itascae Goera stylata Hydroptila novicola Hydroptila quinola Hydroptila rono Hydroptila waskesia Ironoquia punctatissima Lepidostonra libum Limnephilus jamts Limnephihts secludens Ochrotrichia spinosa Oecetis ditissa Oxyethira ecornuta Parapsyche apicalis Polycentropus glacialis Polycentropus milaca Protoptila erotica Protoptila talola Setodes guttatus Tr•iaenodes flavescens Nodes fr•ontalis Cicindela denikei Cicindela hir ticollis rhodensis Attenuipyga vanduzeei Macr osteles clavatus Aeschna sitchensis Aeschna subarctica Boyeria gr•afiana Ophiogomphus howei Ophiogomphus sztsbehcha Somatochlora brevicincta Somatochlora forcipata Old Status T T SC SC SC SC E SC SC SC SC SC T SC SC Page 3 New Status Sc SC E E E SC sc T N N T T N SC T E T T E E E T T T T E SC N N SC T sc E Sc SC sc SC SC SC T SC SC Common Name Scientific Name VASCUJLAR PLANTS Allegheny Vine Moschatel * Rough Bentgrass Winter Bentgrass Narrow- leaved Water Plantain Nodding Wild Onion * Wild Chives Smooth Rock Cress Green Dragon Slimspike Three -awn Seaside Three -awn Great Indian Plantain Clasping Milkweed * Short's Aster Water-hyssop Stream Parsnip Discoid Beggarticks Tailed Grapefem Upswept Moonwort Slender Moonwort Goblin Fern Blunt -lobed Grapefem Pale Moonwort St. Lawrence Grapefem Spathulate Moonwort Purple Reedgrass Larger Water Starwort Cuckoo Flower Carey's Sedge Raven's Foot Sedge Gray's Sedge Hooker's Sedge * Field Sedge Intermediate Sedge Muskingum Sedge New England Sedge Necklace Sedge Ross' Sedge * Weak Arctic Sedge Wood's Sedge Hairy Lip -fern Carolina Spring Beauty Slender Dayflower Late Hawthorn Black Hawthorn Rattlebox Silvery Spleenwort Slender Hair Grass Big Tick Trefoil Stemless Tick Trefoil Obovate Beakgrain Hoary Whitlow Grass Marginal Shield Fern Adlunzia fungosa Adoxa moschatellina Agrostis geminata Agrostis hyemalis Alisrna gramineum Allium cernuum Allium schoenoprasum var. sibiricum Arabis laevigata var. laevigata Arisaenza dracontizrm Aristida longespica var. geniculata Aristida tuberculosa Arnoglossunz reniforme Asclepias amplexicaulis Aster shortii Bacopa rotundifolia Berula erecta Bidens discoidea Botrychium acuminatum Botrychium ascendens Botrychium lineare Botrychium mornzo Botrychium oneidense Botrychium pallidum Botrychium rugulosum Botrychium spathulatum Calamagrostis purpurascens Callitriche heterophylla Cardamine pratensis var. palzrstris Carex careyana Carex crus -corvi Cares grayi Carex hookerana Carex katandinensis Carex media Carex muskingumensis Carex novae-angliae Carex ormostachya Carex rossii Carex supina var. spaniocarpa Carex woodii Cheilanthes lanosa Claytonia caroliniana Commelina erecta Crataegus calpodendron Crataegus douglasii Crotalaria sagittalis Deparia acrostichoides Deschampsia flexuosa Desmodium cuspidatum var. longifolium Desmodium nudiflorum Diarrhena obovata Draba cana Dryopteris marginalia Page 4 Old New Status Status N SC SC N SC N N E N SC T SC T E N SC N SC N E SC T N T SC T T SC SC T -- T N SC N SC N E N E SC T E T E SC T SC N E SC E SC T N T T E SC N (X) N SC SC T N N SC N SC N T N SC N T SC E SC N E N (X) SC N -- E SC T SC SC N SC SC T SC T SC T SC E N E T E • • • Common Name VASCULAR PLANTS (cont.) Three - stamened Waterwort Neat Spikerush Robbins' Spikerush Two Leaf Waterweed Black Huckleberry Northern Oak Fern Kentucky Coffee Tree Witch -hazel Canada Frostweed Beach Heather Appalachian Fir Moss Eastern Green - violet * Butternut Jointed Rush Marginated Rush Slender Rush Catchfly Grass * Small- flowered Woodrush Rock Sandwort Broadleaf Water Milfoil Southern Naiad Old Field Toadflax Clustered Broomrape * Louisiana Broomrape One - flowered Broomrape Canada Forked Chickweed Franklin's Phacelia Broad Beech Fern Wild Sweet William Canadian Ricegrass Scouler's Popcornflower Slender Plantain Tubercled Rein Orchid * Alpine Bistort Christmas Fern Braun's Holly Fern Algae -like Pondweed Oakes' Pondweed Spotted Pondweed * Sheathed Pondweed Vasey's Pondweed Nodding Rattlesnakeroot Rough - fruited Fairybells Swamp White Oak Sooty- colored Beak Rush Bristle -berry Missouri Dewberry Kinnickinnick Dewberry Prince Edward Island Blackberry Swamp Blackberry Bristle -berry Vermont Blackberry * Three- leaved Coneflower Wild Petunia Short- beaked Arrowhead Hooded Arrowhead Satiny Willow Scientific Name Elatine triandra Eleocharis nitida Eleocharis r•obbinsii Elodea bifoliata Gaylussacia baccata Gynznocarpium robertianum Gymnocladus dioica Hamamelis virginiana Helianthemurn canadense Hudsonia tomentosa Hzrper•ia appalachiana Hybanthus concolor Juglans cinerea Juncos ar•ticulatus Juncus marginatus Juncus subtilis Leersia lenticular-is Luzula pal-14110ra ssp. melanocarpa Minuar•tia dawsonensis Myriophyllum heterophyllum Najas guadalupensis ssp. olivacea Nuttallanthzrs canadensis Orobanche fasciculata Orobanche ludoviciana Orobanche unor•a Paronychia canadensis Phacelia fi anklinii Phegopteris hexagonoptera Phlox maculata Piptatherum canadense Plagiobothrys scozrleri Plantago elongata Platanthera flava var. herbiola Polygonum viviparum Polystichum acrostichoides Polystichum braunii Potamogeton confervoides Potamogeton oakesianus Potamogeton pulcher• Potamogeton vaginatus Potamogeton vaseyi Prenanthes crepidinea Prosartes trachycarpa Ouer•cus bicolor Rhynchospora fzrsca Rubzrs fzzlleri Rubus missouricus Rebus multzfer Rubes quaesitus Rubus sernisetosus Rubus stipulatus Rubus vermontanus Rudbeckia triloba Ruellia humilis Sagittaria brevirostra Sagittaria calycina var. calycina Salix pellita Old Status Page 5 New Status N SC T SC N T -- E -- T N SC N SC SC T N SC SC T N SC N E SC E N E SC E N E SC T SC T SC T N SC SC N SC SC T SC T SC T T E SC T T E - SC N T N SC T SC E T SC T T E E T N E N E N E SC E SC N SC N (X) N E N SC SC N -- T E SC SC N T N E SC SC T N (X) SC N E N T SC T Common Name VASCULAR PLANTS (cont.) False Mountain Willow Encrusted Saxifrage * Clinton's Bulrush * Elegant Groundsel Soapberry Cliff Goldenrod Clustered Bur Reed Case's Ladies' Tresses Coralberry Yellow Pimpernel * Rough- seeded Fameflower Hairy jointed Meadow - parsnip * Bitter Fleabane * Short Ray Fleabane Spike Trisetum * Eastern Hemlock Hidden -fruit Bladderwort Purple- flowered Bladderwort Lavender Bladderwort Alpine Bilberry * Silverleaf Grape Alpine Woodsia Oregon Woodsia LICHENS Powdery Almond Lichen Concentric Ring Lichen A Species of Ring Lichen Golden Dot - Iichen Pale- footed Horsehair Lichen Black Disc Lichen A Species of Firedot Lichen Orange - tinted Fringe Lichen A Species of Rim- Iichen Smooth Lungwort Brown -eyed Camouflage Lichen Port-hole Lichen Powdery Saucer Lichen Bolander's Peltula Lichen Ragbag Lichen Brown -gray Moss - shingle Lichen Frayed Ramalina Lichen Angel's Hair Lichen Pixie Foam Lichen A Species of Thelocarpon Lichen Methuselah's Beard Lichen Bloody Beard Lichen Red Beard Lichen Scientific Name Salix pseudomonticola Sax•aga paniculata Scirpus clintonii Senecio indecorus Shepherdia canadensis Solidago sciaphila Sparganium glomeratum Spiranthes casei var. casei Symphoricarpos orbiculatus Taenidia integerrima Talinum r ugosperrnum Thaspium barbinode Trimorpha acris var. asteroides Trimorpha lonchophylla Trisetum spicatum Tsuga canadensis Utricularia geminiscapa Utricularia purpurea Utricularia resupinata Vaccinium zrliginosum Vitis aestivalis Woodsia alpina Woodsia oregana ssp. cathcartiana Amygdalaria panaeola Arctoparmelia centrifztga Arctoparmelia subcentrifztga Arthrorhaphis citrinella Bryoria fitscescens Buellia nigra Caloplaca stellata Heterodermia obscurata Lecanora epanora Lobaria quercizans Melanelia subolivacea Menegazzia terebrata Ochrolechia androgyna Peltula bolanderi Platismatia glauca Protopannaria pezizoides Ramalina roesleri Ramalina thrausta Stereocaulon pileatum Thelocarpon epibolznn Usnea longissima Usnea mutabilis Usnea rubicunda Old Status T SC SC SC SC N SC N E SC SC SC N SC SC T SC SC N E SC Page 6 New Status sc SC T E SC N N T N SC T SC E T SC E T E T E T T SC sc SC SC T SC SC SC SC T N SC SC SC T SC T T SC SC SC SC T SC • • • • Common Name MOSSES AND LIVERWORTS Lidded Earth Moss Wave- leaved Crane's -bill Moss Little Saw Moss Bud - headed Thread Moss Differential Branched Crease Capsule Moss Sword Moss Egg-leaf True Moss Bua on -a -stick Moss Hair - pointed Feather Moss Hidden - perianth Liverwort Mowed Mosquito Moss Pygmy Plume Moss Tall Extinguisher Moss Selwyn's Ear -leaf Liverwort Spaced -out Tangle Moss Rolled -leaf Wet- ground Moss Wright's Blunt Leaved True Moss Lustrous Bow Moss Swan Moss Urn - bearing Hair Moss Cushion Peat Moss Red Twisted Peat Moss Red Parasol Moss Nipple Moss * Curved - leaved Golden Moss Shortleaf Chalk Moss Down Liverwort FUNGI A Species of Fungus A Species of Fungus Scientific Name Aphanorrhegma serrature Atrichum crispum Atrichum tenellum Aulacomnium androgynwn Azlacomnium heterostichum Bryoxiphium norvegicum Bryztm cyclophyllum Buxbaztmia aphylla Cirriphyllum piliferum Czyptocolea imbricate Cynodontium schisti Cyrto- hypnum pygmaeum Encalypta procera Frullania selwyniana Heterocladium dimorph= Hyophila involuta Jaffueliobryum wrightii Lescztraea saxicola Meesia uliginosa Pogonatzmz urnigerwn Sphagnum compactum Sphagnum lescurii Splachnurn rubrum Melia hirtella Tonzenthypnurn falcifolium Tortella inclinata Trichocolea tomentella Boletus subcaerulescens Sarcosoma globosum Old Status SC SC Page 7 New Status Sc SC SC SC SC E SC SC T T T SC SC SC SC SC SC T SC SC T T E SC N SC T sc SC DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF ECOLOGICAL AND WATER RESOURCES In The Matter Of Proposed Amendment to and Repeal of Rules Governing Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species in Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS General Statement Introduction Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species (List) was created in 1984, amended in 1996, and has remained unchanged since. The List, established under the authority of Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute, draws attention to species that are at greatest risk of extinction within the state; special regulations are applied to those listed as endangered or threatened. By alerting resource managers and the public to species in jeopardy, activities can be reviewed and prioritized to help preserve the diversity and abundance of Minnesota's flora and fauna. Because of the importance of this List in influencing resource use and management activities in Minnesota, it is critical that it reflect the most current information regarding the distribution, abundance, and security of species within the state. In this document, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) describes and explains the changes it proposes to make to the status of 302 species of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, fish, mollusks, jumping spiders, butterflies and moths, caddisflies, tiger beetles, leafhoppers, dragonflies, vascular plants, lichens, mosses and Liverworts, and fungi. History of Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute Minnesota law pertaining to endangered species dates to Laws of Minnesota 1971, Ch. 825, which listed several animal species as endangered, and granted authority to the DNR's commissioner to add or delete animals by rule. Laws of Minnesota 1974, Ch. 465 added a threatened category to the statute and dropped the listing of specific species in statute. Laws of Minnesota 1981, Ch. 285 added a special concern category to the statute, and added plants to the statute's protection. The statute, entitled Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species was codified into its current form (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895) in 1986 (Laws of Minnesota 1986, Ch. 386, art. 4, s. 9). Content of Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute and Associated Rule Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute provides protection to species at risk of extinction within Minnesota, and reflects the Legislature's intent that the DNR manage these species in such a way as to prevent their extinction and restore their viability within the bounds of the state, and thus maintain all elements of the state's native flora and fauna. The statute identifies those activities from which an endangered species is protected (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 1), specifies that violation of this prohibition is a misdemeanor (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 9), and authorizes peace officers or conservation officers to enforce the statute (Minn. Stat., secs. 84.0894 and 84.0895, subd. 6). It authorizes the DNR commissioner to conduct studies to support species conservation (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 4), to develop programs, orders, and rules to recover species from threatened or endangered status (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 5), and to designate species as endangered, threatened, or of special concern (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 3, see below). While the statute and associated rule provide protection from prohibited acts to all endangered or threatened species, species of special concern receive no such protection. The statute also provides exemptions from its stated prohibitions for: 1) plants on land classified for property tax purposes as class 2a or 2b agricultural land, or on ditches and roadways; 2) noxious weeds designated as such under statute or weeds otherwise designated as troublesome by the Department of Agriculture; 3) noxious weed control; 4) the application of pesticides or other agricultural chemicals on land adjacent to class 3 or 3b agricultural land; and 5) the accidental taking of endangered and threatened plants where the existence of the plant is not known at the time of the taking (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 2). It also provides for the capture or destruction of a protected species, without permit, to avoid an immediate and demonstrable threat to human life or Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 2 • • • • • property (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7(c)). Further, the statute authorizes the DNR commissioner to issue permits, including general permits, that allow the prohibited acts if: 1) the act is for purposes of zoological, educational, or scientific study; 2) the act enhances the propagation or survival of the affected species; 3) the act prevents injury to persons or property (provided that all alternatives, including live trapping and transplantation, have been evaluated and rejected); or 4) the social and economic benefits of the act outweigh the harm caused by it (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7). The statute also authorizes the DNR commissioner to prescribe conditions to propagate a species or subspecies (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7(b)), and allows the commissioner to issue permits for forest management (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 7(d)). Finally, the statute specifies that it does not apply retroactively to, or prohibit importation into the state of species (or their parts) that are legally acquired from elsewhere (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 8). Rules governing permits for the taking, possession, and disposition of endangered species were first promulgated in 1974 (Commissioners Order No. 1901; July 31, 1974). These were substantially expanded in 1985, and extended protection and permit requirements to threatened species as well (Commissioners Order No. 2204; May 30, 1985). The provisions of Commissioners Order No. 2204 were codified into rule in 1993 (18 S.R. 83; July 12, 1993), and are found at Minn. Rules, parts 6212.1800 to 6212.2300. The permit scheme, including the application process, limits on possession of specimens or their offspring, reporting, and expiration or cancellation of permits is detailed in Minn. Rules, part 6212.1800. Permitting for the rehabilitation of living specimens, possession of previously acquired specimens or specimens acquired as a result of emergency taking, and other activities otherwise prohibited is detailed in Minn. Rules, parts 6212.1900 to 6212.2300. Note that Minn. Rules, parts 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 are not the subject of this rulemaking. History of Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species The authority to designate state endangered animals by rulemaking was first given to the DNR commissioner in Laws of Minnesota 1971, Ch. 825, although this authority was not exercised until 1984. However, the 1971 law listed several species as endangered, and provided that an "endangered" designation by the Secretary of the Interior (pursuant to federal endangered species law) would be prima facie evidence for a state designation by the commissioner. The category of threatened animals was added to the authority to designate species in Laws of Minnesota 1974, Ch. 465. The 1974 amendment reaffirmed the DNR commissioner's authority to designate state endangered and threatened animals, and dropped the statutory list of species created in 1971, but provided that "...until the commissioner adopts such a regulation, those species designated as endangered by Section 4(c)(3) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Public Law 93 -205) at the time of enactment thereof shall be considered endangered within the meaning of this section." The special concern category was added to the statute in 1981, as was the application of all three categories to plants (Laws of Minnesota 1981, Ch. 285). The 1981 amendment once again directed the DNR commissioner to promulgate by rule a state List, required the convening of a voluntary Technical Advisory Committee to assist in developing the List, and specified that the List be promulgated by January 1, 1984. The 1981 amendment also provided that this committee would terminate upon adoption of the resulting rule, but in no event later than January 1, 1984. As a result, the advisory committee provision is not a part of the current statute. Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species was adopted on March 5, 1984. Promulgation of this List resulted in the legislature deleting the language incorporating the federal list into Minnesota law (Laws of Minnesota 1986, Ch. 386). The 1981 amendment also added the requirement that "The commissioner shall reevaluate the designated species list every three years after it is first adopted and make appropriate changes." (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 3(c)) In 1987, the DNR published a notice in the State Register stating (in part) that "the 1984 list remains an accurate statement of the status of Minnesota's native fauna and flora and therefore the current list will remain in effect through 1990." (12 S.R. 1266, December 21, 1987) Revision of the List was initiated in 1990 and the resulting revised rule became effective on July 1, 1996. This List is codified as Minn. Rules, Ch. 6134 ( "Department of Natural Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 3 Resources, Endangered and Threatened Species "). The current process of revising Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species began in 1999. Revision of Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species The DNR began the current process of revising Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species in 1999 by reviewing available information on the distribution and abundance of the state's fish, wildlife, and plants. Considerable progress had been made by the DNR in completing surveys of rare species in large portions of the state since the List was amended in 1996, and a preliminary request for suggested changes to the List was emailed to DNR staff in December 1999. Also in December 1999, the DNR Commissioner requested permission from the Governor's Office to publish a Request for Comments in the State Register. Permission was received, and a Request for Comments was published in the State Register on January 18, 2000. This Notice was also mailed to all persons and organizations that are registered with the DNR for the purpose of receiving notices of rulemaking proceedings. Subsequent staffing and workload changes within the DNR diverted staff attention from this effort, and little additional progress was made until 2004. Between July 2004 and December 2006, DNR staff developed draft amendments to the List. For species groups about which DNR staff expertise existed (mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, fish, mollusks, butterflies and moths, and vascular plants), staff were relied upon to identify those species for which new information warranted a change in listed status. For those species groups for which new information was available but DNR expertise was insufficient (jumping spiders, caddisflies, tiger beetles, leafhoppers, dragonflies, lichens, mosses and liverworts, and fungi), external experts were identified and consulted. A list of all internal and external experts who participated in developing the draft amendments is included in Appendix A. Because of the hiatus following the 2000 Request for Comments, on December 1, 2006 the DNR Commissioner informed the Governor's Office that the rule making initiated in 2000 was being renewed, and requested permission to republish a Request for Comments in the State Register. Permission was received, and a new Request for Comments was published in the State Register on January 2, 2007. On that same date, the DNR published Draft Amendments to Minnesota's List of Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern Species (Draft) by posting the Draft on the DNR website at http: / /www.dnr. state .mn.us /ets /rulesrevision.html. The availability of the draft was simultaneously publicized through press releases, emails, and notices sent through the U.S. mail to a list of stakeholders compiled from various in -house mailing lists, persons and organizations who had previously expressed interest in this rulemaking, and all persons and organizations that are registered with the DNR for the purpose of receiving notices of rulemaking proceedings. The Draft included recommended changes to the status of 273 species of plants and animals, and provided brief explanations for each recommended change. The DNR website also provided an online comment form for submitting comments to the DNR. Between January 2007 and November 2009, the DNR has received 423 comments on the status of 199 species from 151 commenters. DNR staff have carefully evaluated each comment received by the DNR and have made many adjustments to the 2007 draft amendments in response to new information received through this process. Development of the Proposed Amendments presented in this Statement of Need and Reasonableness relied upon the DNR staffs professional judgment to evaluate whether or not a species meets the statutory definitions of "endangered," "threatened," or "of special concern" as provided by Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subds. 3(a) and 3(b): "Subd. 3. Designation. (a) The commissioner shall adopt rules under chapter 14, to designate species of wild animal or plant as: (1) endangered, if the species is threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range; (2) threatened, if the species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range; or (3) species of special concern, if although the species is not endangered or threatened, it is extremely uncommon in this state, or has unique or highly specific habitat requirements and deserves careful monitoring of its status. Species on the periphery of their range that are Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 4 • • • • not listed as threatened may be included in this category along with those species that were once threatened or endangered but now have increasing or protected, stable populations. (b) The range of the species in this state is a factor in determining its status as endangered, threatened, or of special concern. A designation by the secretary of the interior that a species is threatened or endangered is a prima facie showing under this section." In applying this statutory standard, two assumptions were made to reinforce the Legislature's intent that the DNR prevent the extinction and restore the viability of species within the bounds of the state, and thus maintain all elements of the state's native flora and fauna: 1) The phrase "species of wild animal or plant" refers only to species that are believed to reproduce within the state at present, and thus only these species are considered to be eligible for designation as endangered, threatened, or of special concern. Given the limited financial resources of the DNR for use in funding research and management of listed species, this assumption allows the DNR to focus on those species for which there is some evidence of the potential for population viability and species recovery. Without this assumption, the species evaluation process would have had to consider any accidental or vagrant species that has been observed, however infrequently, in the state. 2) The use of the word "range" within the phrase "all or a significant portion of its range" refers to a species' geographic distribution within this state, given that the state's jurisdiction is limited to the territory within the state's boundaries. This interpretation is supported by the sentence "The range of the species in this state is a factor in determining its status as endangered, threatened or of special concern." (Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895, subd. 3(b)). In keeping with this statutory language, whether a species is more or less common outside the state than it is within the state was considered to be of only minor significance in the species evaluation process. Thus, whether Minnesota's population of a species was peripheral, central, or otherwise related to the species' continental range was also considered to be of only minor significance in the species evaluation process. In fact, due to Minnesota's location at the intersection of three major continental biomes (prairie, boreal forest, deciduous forest), the vast majority of the state's species are at the periphery of their range, but this may or may not affect whether a species is at risk of extinction in the state. Staff deliberation has produced the set of proposed revisions to the List that constitute the proposed amendments to Minn. Rules, Ch. 6134 presented in this Statement of Need and Reasonableness. Statutory Authority The Department's statutory authority to adopt the rules is set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0895, subd. 3(a), which authorizes and mandates the Commissioner of Natural Resources to adopt rules under Minn. Stat., Ch. 14 to designate species of wild animals or plants as endangered, threatened, or of special concern. Regulatory Analysis Description of the Classes of Persons Affected by the Proposed Rules The proposed rules will affect persons whose activities may result in the prohibited acts of taking, possessing, importing, transporting, or selling any portion of a species that is proposed to be added to or removed from endangered or threatened status. The proposed rules may also affect persons whose activities have a potential to affect a species that is proposed to be added to special concern status. The activities referenced above could include forest management, mining, infrastructure (e.g., road, bridge, railroad, pipeline, power generation, landfill, airport, wastewater treatment) construction and maintenance, residential or commercial land development, environmental consulting, propagation and sale of horticultural species, aquatic plant management, falconry, minnow harvest, education, and research. Probable Costs to the Agency or Other Agencies from the Proposed Rule The proposed rule will result in a net 49% increase (from 197 to 293) in the number of endangered or threatened species receiving regulatory protection. This increase may result in an increase in the amount of DNR effort invested in endangered species environmental review and in takings permit Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 5 issuance. However, most species proposed for listing as endangered or threatened exist in the same locations as do other already listed endangered or threatened species, so the increase in staff effort will be much less than proportionate to the increase in number of protected species. The proposed rules will result in a net 15% increase (from 20 to 23) in the number of mussel species receiving regulatory protection as endangered or threatened. The DNR and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MDOT) have a history of close coordination when proposed bridge construction projects may result in the taking of protected mussels. The goal of this coordination is to avoid, minimize, and /or mitigate impacts to mussels, and can result in additional project expense for MDOT. However, the mussel species proposed for endangered or threatened status generally exist in the same locations as do other already listed endangered or threatened species, so the DNR anticipates that the effect of these additional species on MDOT project costs will be minimal. Determination of Less Costly or Less Intrusive Methods for Achieving the Purpose of the Proposed Rules The proposed rules will identify species at the greatest risk of extinction within the state, and which meet the statutory definitions of endangered, threatened, and special concern as provided by Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895. The purpose of these designations is to address the mandate of Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute by alerting resource managers, landowners, and the public to species in jeopardy so that activities can be reviewed and prioritized to help preserve the diversity and abundance of Minnesota's flora and fauna. There are no Less costly or less intrusive methods available for achieving this outcome, since any method that fails to identify species at the greatest risk of extinction will also fail to affect the recovery and conservation of those species. Description of Alternate Methods for Achieving the Purpose of the Proposed Rules The designation of species as endangered, threatened, and of special concern provides the DNR, other resource management agencies, landowners, and the public with a list of priority species (comprising a very small percentage of all species occurring within the state) that warrant additional attention in order to avoid their extinction from the state. General improvement in the use and management of land and water within the state can certainly impart some limited benefits to species at risk of extinction, but without the focus provided by this designation, there is no assurance that these species will receive the protection they need. Similarly, public education regarding the broader use and management of land and water within the state may benefit some at risk species, but without the designation provided by the proposed rule, there is no guarantee that the mandate of the Endangered and Threatened Species Statute will be addressed. No alternative to the designation of species as endangered, threatened, or of special concern will achieve the mandated outcomes. Probable Costs of Complying with the Proposed Rules The proposed rule will increase the number of endangered or threatened species receiving regulatory protection from 197 to 293. By definition, most of these species are very rare and are known to exist at very few locations within the state. Also, most endangered or threatened species occur in undisturbed habitats that also support other species previously designated as endangered or threatened. In such cases, the proposed rule will have no additional regulatory impact. However, there will be cases in which a species proposed as endangered or threatened in this rulemaking occurs in a location where no previously designated endangered or threatened species exists. When a proposed activity has the potential to take an endangered or threatened species, the activity may need to be modified in order to avoid the taking. This avoidance of taking may result in additional costs to the proposed activity. The DNR does not have data to quantify the additional cost of avoidance of taking, since this type of modification is made during the design phase of a proposed activity, and cannot be separated from other costs. When the taking of an endangered or threatened species by a proposed activity cannot be avoided, consultation between the DNR and the proposer of the activity may result in the issuance of a takings permit in conjunction with some form of mitigation. Anaysis of the cost of mitigation can be separated into two general categories, as follows. Twenty takings permits have been issued in the past decade for proposed bridge or pipeline projects in Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 6 • • • • • which the take of endangered or threatened freshwater mussels could not be avoided. In all cases, the proposer of the activity was a utility company, a large city, a county, or the Minnesota Department of Transportation. In most cases, the project proposer was required to remove and transplant the mussels to a nearby location, an expense bourne by the proposer of the activity. The DNR does not know the actual cost of these mitigation actions, but a typical mussel relocation project costs $5,000 - $60,000. In four recent cases, the DNR chose to apply the cost of mussel relocation to other mussel conservation activities. These mitigation payments ranged from $43,993 to $90,000. An additional 20 takings permits have been issued in the past decade for proposed projects in which the take of endangered or threatened plants could not be avoided. In all cases, the proposer of the activity was a land development, utility, mining, or waste management company, a county, an airport authority, or the Minnesota Department of Transportation. In several of these cases, experimental relocation of the plants was accepted as mitigation, but in most cases, compensatory mitigation was accepted by the DNR in the form of funds necessary to acquire and protect land supporting a plant population equivelant to the population to be taken by the project. Depending upon land values and the size of the plant population to be taken, the cost of compensatory mitigation in these cases has ranged from $12,000 to $500,000. The proposed rules will also have an impact on a limited number of small businesses engaging in the prohibited acts of taking, importing, transporting, selling, purchasing, disposing, or possessing any portion of a species proposed as endangered or threatened in this rulemaking. These businesses may include taxidermists, pet dealers, craftspersons, tree nurseries, landscapers, and loggers. Such businesses may be asked to consult with the DNR to modify their activity to avoid or minimize the taking of an endangered or threatened species, may be required to apply for a permit to continue the activity, or may be prohibited from conducting the activity. While a permit is currently provided at no cost to the recipient, modification or prohibition of the activity may result in a cost to these businesses. The DNR has no effective way in which to estimate this cost. Probable Cost or Consequences of Not Adopting the Proposed Rules The consequence of not adopting the proposed rules would be that the species that are the subject of the proposed rule would not receive the protection and attention they warrant, and the DNR would default on its responsibility to designate species as endangered, threatened, or of special concern as mandated in Minn. Stat., sec. 84.0895. Assessment of Differences between the Proposed Rules and Existing Federal Regulations The federal Endangered Species Act (16 USC 1531 -1544) requires the U.S. Department of Interior to designate species as endangered or threatened according to a set of definitions and criteria that are distinct from those in state law. Federal designation reflects a species' at -risk status at the regional, national, or global scale, while designation in the proposed rule considers a species' status at only the state scale, regardless of the species' status outside of Minnesota. This difference in scale of analysis is needed and reasonable, since the intent of state law is to prevent extinction of a species within Minnesota, while the intent of federal designation is to prevent extinction at the regional, national, or global scale. Assessment of the Cumulative Effect of the Proposed Rules with Other Federal and State Regulations For this assessment, "cumulative effect" means the incremental impact of the proposed rule in addition to other rules, regardless of what state or federal agency has adopted the other rules. Cumulative effects can result from individually minor but collectively significant rules adopted over a period of time. The proposed rule has no cumulative effect with any other state or federal regulation. No other state regulation specifically designates species as endangered, threatened, or of special concern, but designation of a species as endangered or threatened (E /T) grants the species regulatory protection, and other state laws also afford regulatory protection to certain species. Most prominently, Minn. Stat. sec. 97A.015, subd. 39 designates most vertebrates as "protected wild animal(s)," and Minn. Stat. sec. 97A.405 provides some regulatory protection to those species. However, the protection given an E/T species is not cumulative with the protection given a protected wild animal, but rather is Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 7 more restrictive than the protection given a protected wild animal and is therefore a substitute for the lower level of protection. Similarly, Minn. Stat. sec. 18H.18 restricts collecting of certain wildflower species. Again, however, protection given an E/T species is not cumulative with the protection given certain wildflowers, but rather is far more restrictive than the protection given those wildflowers, and again is a substitute for the lower level of protection. Further, most species (including all small mammals, snakes, bats, and salamanders, all invertebrates except for mussels, and almost all vascular plants) are not protected under any other state law. No cumulative effect with any other state regulation exists for any of Minnesota's animal and plant species affected by the proposed rule. The federal Endangered Species Act (16 USC 1531 -1544; "federal ESA ") requires the U.S. Department of Interior to designate species as endangered or threatened according to a set of definitions and criteria that are distinct from those in state law. Only 13 of Minnesota's thousands of animal and plant species are currently designated as endangered or threatened under the federal ESA, and the proposed rule contains no change in state regulatory protection for any of these species. Under the federal ESA, federally designated animals receive regulatory protection that is far more restrictive than that afforded by state designation as E /T, and so is a substitute for state protection rather than having a cumulative effect. In contrast, federally designated plants receive regulatory protection only if the plant is growing on federal land or if an action is federally funded or permitted, in which case the federal regulatory protection is far more restrictive than that afforded by state designation as E /T, and so is a substitute for state protection rather than having a cumulative effect. Otherwise, federally designated plants receive no federal regulatory protection, and there is no cumulative effect resulting from the species' E/T designation under state law. No cumulative effect with any federal regulation exists for any of Minnesota's animal and plant species affected by the proposed rule. Performance -Based Rules The regulatory objective of the proposed rules is to identify as accurately as possible those species that meet the statutory definition of endangered, threatened, and of special concern. A species is assigned to one of these designations only if information is available to support the conclusion that the species' status meets the designation's statutory definition. DNR staff and external advisors whose deliberations have produced the proposed rule are all highly trained experts who make an on -going effort to remain well - informed regarding the biology and taxonomy of the species upon which they focus, as well as the science of assessing the vulnerability of species to extinction. All available information is carefully considered in making these determinations. The intent of Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute is to preserve the diversity and abundance of Minnesota's flora and fauna by protecting and managing species included in the List. By designating endangered, threatened, and special concern species as is proposed in these rules, the DNR ensures that only those species most urgently in need of recovery will be the focus of the DNR's rare species conservation efforts. The DNR accepts recommendations from the public and other regulated parties regarding a change in the designated status of a species at any time, and the DNR will continue to revise the List as new information becomes available. Consultation with MMB on Local Government Impact As required by Minnesota Statutes, section 14.131, the DNR will consult with the Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB). The DNR will do this by sending the MMB copies of the documents that are sent to the Governor's Office for review and approval on the same day they are sent to the Governor's office. The DNR will do this before publication of the Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules. The documents will include: the Governor's Office Proposed Rule and SONAR Form; the proposed rules; and the SONAR. The DNR will submit a copy of the cover correspondence and any response received from Minnesota Management and Budget to the Office of Administrative Hearing at the hearing or with the documents it submits for Administrative Law Judge review. Determination about Rules Requiring Local Implementation Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 8 • • • • • • As required by Minnesota Statutes, sec. 14.128, sub. 1, the DNR has considered whether these proposed rules will require a local government to adopt or amend any ordinance or other regulation in order to comply with these rules. The agency has determined that they require no local government implementation because implementation of these rules and the List they modify is accomplished exclusively through their application under Minnesota's Endangered and Threatened Species Statute, which is the responsibility of the DNR and not of local governments. Cost of Complying for Small Business or Small City As required by Minnesota Statutes, sec. 14.127, the Department has considered whether the cost of complying with the proposed rules in the first year after the rules take effect will exceed $25,000 for any small business or small city. The Department conducted the following analysis and has determined that the cost of complying with the proposed rules in the first year after the rules take effect is unlikely to exceed $25,000 for any small business or small city. The proposed amendments to Minn. Rules, Ch. 6134 may have an impact on small businesses engaging in the prohibited acts of taking, import, transport, sale, purchase, disposal, or possession of any portion of a species proposed as endangered or threatened in this rulemaking. These businesses may include taxidermists, pet dealers, craftspersons, tree nurseries, landscapers, loggers, and others who may use or take protected species or their parts in their activities. Such businesses may be asked to consult with the DNR to modify the activity to avoid the taking or may be required to apply for a permit to continue these activities. A permit is currently provided at no cost to the recipient. Modification of activities may result in a small cost to these businesses, but will not exceed $25,000 in the first year after the rules take effect. In some cases, as discussed in the Regulatory Analysis section of this SONAR, mitigation for a permitted take may be required. However, in the past decade there are no cases in which such mitigation was required of a small business or small city. Alternative Format Upon request, this Statement of Need and Reasonableness can be made available in an alternative format, such as large print, Braille, or cassette tape. To make a request, contact Richard Baker at Department of Natural Resources, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN, 55155 -4025, phone 651 -259- 5073, fax 651- 296 -1811, and richard.baker @state.mn.us. TTY users may call the Department of Natural Resources at 1- 800 - 657 -3929 or 651- 296 -5484. Additional Notice The Notice Plan for these rules includes giving notice as required by statute. The DNR will: • mail the Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules to everyone who has registered to be on the Department's rulemaking mailing list under Minnesota Statutes, section 14.14, subdivision la; • give notice to the Legislature per Minnesota Statutes, section 14.116; • mail the Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules to all persons and organizations who were notified of the availability of the Proposed Amendments in January, 2007; • mail the Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules to all persons and organizations who submitted comments to the DNR on the Proposed Amendments between January 2007 and the present; • mail the Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules to environmental and social organizations, businesses, individuals, state legislators who have an interest in these areas, and staff from bordering states that are responsible for rule making; • distribute news releases to the media that detail the major parts of the rule; and • use the DNR web site to inform the public of our intent to adopt rules and take requests for hearings Witnesses If these rules go to public hearing, the witnesses listed below may testify on behalf of the DNR, as necessary, in support of the need for and reasonableness of the rules. If these witnesses are needed to testify, they will be available to answer questions about the development and the content of the rules. The witnesses for the DNR who are employees of the DNR include: Proposed Amendment of Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6134: Endangered and Threatened Species Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012 Page 9 iRecycling Tonnage 2008 -2012 -r 5ee+ha.rj 2.cst3 Year Goal Actual Ibs Per Person % of Goal 2013 1819 1st half -1026 2012 1819 2032.25 203.36 112 2011 1777 1877.11 184.89 106 2010 1749 1888.72 188.99 108 2009 1737 1900.87 191.51 109 2008 1727 1946.55 197.26 112 1st Half 1026 •