Laserfiche WebLink
NOV-10-99 05 :39 PM p. 08 <br /> DATA FORM <br /> ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION METHOD <br /> Soil Pit 1-C <br /> Field Investigator(s): Arlig Date: August 5, 1999 <br /> County: RAMSEY - Plant Community: UPLAND <br /> Site Information: Cedar Ridge Homes Plant Community at this Point: upland <br /> Mounds View, MN MN DNR no NWI no <br /> Environmental conditions at the plant community: Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrolog_: ('een si -lin can tly <br /> disturbed: Yes 4 No _ <br /> Comments: See 1-A, plus wooded and may have been filled in past <br /> r ... .F ,a•'. 'irt 4• _ t., ° .aPT r ° 4 r l+. r; _ *' <br /> ' • <br /> DOMINANT VEGETATION <br /> Common Name Species Name % Cover Indicator S a!:ts Stratum <br /> 1.Common buckthorn Rhamnus cathartics 40% FAG j shrub <br /> 2. Black nightshade .Solanum nigrum 20% FACU- [io:b/herb <br /> 3.White lover . Trifolium repens 20% FACU-- I forb/herb <br /> 4.Boxelder Acer negundo <10 .e <br /> 5,American thimbleweed Anemone quinquefolia <10% FAC' I forb/herb <br /> 6.Solomon's Seal Polygonatum biflorum <10% FACU herb/forb <br /> 7. <br /> 8. <br /> 9. _ ...� <br /> Percent of dominant species that are OI3L, FACW, and/or FAC 0 % of dominants, <br /> Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met?Yes No x <br /> Rationale: Less than 50%h dro.12 es <br /> . ....... ......:... :•r.: .r... ;.... .ni} ..rx t!R t .atefib, <br /> °' i w•.7��t4 'E :}1::..'�•:!« °'i�r.-•tni •........'_..e.iL.,...1 P . '} , ': .#‘`'p::i i ...,...-. a..... .. __�. ... ...,..1 <br /> SOILS <br /> Series/phase: Urban land-Lincomolex Stabgroup:2 Aauic udipsa^: cuts ._...._— .. <br /> Is the soil on the hydric soils list?Yes_ No x Undetermined <br /> Is the soil a Histosol?Yes— No x Histic epipedon present? Yes No <br /> Is the soil: Mottled?Yes Na Gleyed?Yes No x <br /> Matrix Color: 212 on 10YR in ton ". then lenses of 4/3 mate 'a <br /> Other soil characteristics: sandy loose material, @16" below surface decaying leaves (perhaps :iia in .:ti' en more sand <br /> Is the hydric soil criterion met?Yes_ No t� <br /> Rationale:Not on list, no indicators �nm <br /> :>*-�[`. '.p!;,:5.: : �d:}.::t.Jy;.f.:r."i.u:,:r itf .:'at •..y.f,Si?:4�. ..1Z.;,wy,./ at `�+"f".". �+.fr -erj°S ` :. ... <br /> . '.i.�. •..'a:i'a'"•..•:•;:11}bt'S'�'!st..'! ....r�..+.�}fc L!...:_t..l,�:'•.,...:�iw:IY.4•-..:./K£�,i::....: ^. .r r�i,...G.T. <br /> HYDROLOGY <br /> Is the ground surface inundated?Yes_ No x Surface water depth: <br /> Is the soil saturated?Yes_ No <br /> Depth to free-standing water in pit/soil probe hole: not fougd <br /> List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: elevation above grade cbt t>,.., on s;: !, <br /> Is,the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes_ No, X <br /> Rationale: water not found within a foot of surface _ ------- <br /> JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE <br /> Is the plant community a wetland?Yes No <br /> Rationale for jurisdictional decision: soil and hydrology PARAMETERS MET <br />