2000-12-21 Replacement Wetland Monitoring Report Year IISVOBODA ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Providing the Sharper Edge in Natural Resources & Environmental,Consulting
~-
D b 2 20 -
ecem er 1, 00 .
-Lisa Goeb
_ City Administrator
P.O. Box 9 _
Albertville, MN 55301
KE: Project name: Minneapolis Factory Shoppes
Project location: E 1/2 of Section 35, T. 121 N, R. 24 W, Albertville, Wright
County, Minnesota
Project No.: 2000-010-26
"Project Description: Replacement Wetland Monitoring Report - Year"II~(LGU Edition)
Dear Ms. Goeb:
Pursuant to Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) §8420.0620 and also to the Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) permit issued for this project, Svoboda Ecological Resources (SER) ,
staffvisited the above referenced site on June 30 and August 1.0, and. September 28, 2000, for the
purpose of monitoring the progress of the proposed replacement wetlands and wetland buffer.
seeding areas. This is, the second year of monitoring out of the five .years required by the WCA
and by the Corps permit to determine if replacement wetlands satisfy replacement of functions and
values lost by permitted wetland fill. The purpose of this year's. field visits was to: ,
1) Obtain.three seasonal water hvel measurements between April and October;
2) Develop a list of dominant vegetation in the wetland; and
3) Take color photographs from the photo reference points to document progress. ~ '
In addition, SER staff inspected the sites for existing or potential problems with the progress of
the replacement wetland areas. A previous version of this report was sent to the Army Corps of
Engineers and to the client on August 30, 200.0,. to satisfy the report deadline date stated in the
Corps permit. One field visit was performed since that time to satisfy the three visits required by
"the WCA and to help. determine why wetland hydrology is lower than expected.
As you are aware, approximately 113,691 ftz (2.61 acres) of wetland fill is associated with-this
project: As a result, 170;320 ft2 (3.91 acres) of ~Tew Wetland Creation and 202,990 ftz (4.66
acres) of Public Value Credit was proposed under the Wetland Replacement Plan Application
Revised Plan submitted by the client. The Revised Plan proposed free new wetland creation areas
located in the .southern and western, portions of the site, `and three areas of wetland buffer seeding
area located on the western and southern portions of the development. To maintain~consistency
2477 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331
(95~) 471-1100 (Office) (952) 471-0007 (Fax) -
,~ ~
- with the [Zevised Plan, these new wetland creation areas are labeled NWC-1,2,3,4, and 5. During
our site visits, these five proposed mitigated wetland areas were observed.
During the first site visit,in 1999, none of the basins or the wetland buffer seeding areas had been
completely developed. By the last visit, it appeared as if the mitigated areas were completed or
very close. to completion. In 2000, these areas had been completed. Thus, since it could not be
done last year, a comparison of as-built specifications ofwetlands with the design specifications
was made this year. " _
O13SER VA TIONS -
NWC-1
This area was designed to provide 1.62 acres of New Wetland Creation (NWC} credit. The
desired wetland type noted in the Replacement Plan Application (RPA) was Type 3 palustrine,
emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). The basin appeared'to be a Type 1/3
PEMAfCx wetland at the time of the June visitation, but lack of hydrology caused this area to be
re-classified as Type 1 PEMA in August. In June, there-was open water with tadpoles in it
ponded at about 3 inches deep covering 25% of the basin, although the east_side was very dry. In
August and September, however, there was no open water, and a soil bore hole revealed that
there. was no water to 18 inches belosv~he soil surface. Adjacent slopes ranged between 3:1 to
greater than 3:1. Killdeer were observed using this site in June and August.
Vegetation was just establishing in this area in June; .there was little vegetation on the east side at
this time. More plants had established by August; accordingly, this basin was covered by 40%
bare ground in June, but only about 1 ~% bare ground by August. Cattail (Typhec sp.) covered.
about 10% of this area in June and 1 >% in August. Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea)
.also increased, from 15% in June to 20% in August. By September, however, reed canary grass
covered about 60% of the basin. Water plantain (Alisma subcordatum) covered about 5% of the,
site. In August, water smartweed (Polygonum amphibium) covered 20%, and barnyard grass
(Echinochloa crusgalli) and foxtail (Setaria sp.) together covered 5% of the basin. Foxtail
increased to about 20% of the basin by October. Non-dominants covered between 5 and 15% of
the basin _and included common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), blue vervain (Verbena
hastata), timothy (Phleum pratense), needle rush (Eleocharis acicularis), tickle grass (Agrostis - '
hyemalis), cinquefoil (Potentilla sp.), and curly dock (Rumex crispus). _
Plants in the"adjacent upland area were also noted, and included rbed canary grass (which was
dominant), hoary vervain (Verbena sn•icta), quacksrass (Agropj~ron repens), foxtail barley l
(Horedum jubatum), starwort (Stellaria sp.), cinquefoil, daisy fleabane (Erigeron annuus), curly
dock, fringed brome (Bromus ciliatrzs), water smartweed, yarrow (Achillea millefolium),
common plantain (Plantago major), dandelion (Taraxacum offzcinale), blue vervain, bull thistle
(Cirsium vulgare), timothy, Kentucky- bluegrass (Poa:pratensis), barley (Hordeum vulgare),
foxtail, a"white-flowered smartweed (Polygonum sp.), alfalfa" (Medicago sativa), and common
ragweed. _
.t .re
NWC_2
This area was designed to provide 1. I -1 acres of NWC credit. The desired wetland type noted in
the RPA was Type 3 palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). The
basin appeared to be a Type 1 /3, PEl~~[ A%Cx wetland at the time of the June visitation, but lack of
hydrology caused this area. to be re-classified as Type 1. P'E1VIA in August. In Jµr~e, there was
open water ponded at about 4 to 6 inches deep covering 15% of the site, but in other areas the.
soil was not even saturated. ~In August, there was very li~ttle(less than 5%) open water; water that
was there was ponded to ,lbout 4 inches: A soil bore hole augured within 2 yards. of the ponded
-water revealed that there was no water to 21 inches below the soil surface. There was no open
water in this basin by ,September. Adjacent slopes ranged between 3:1 to greater than 3 :1.
There was a lot of dry, cracked soil in this basin; bare ground decreased from about 60% of the _
basin in June to 20% in August.,_ Conversely, plant cover increased between June and August. In
June, tirhothy, reed canary grass, quackgrass, and red top (Agrostis gigantea) combined covered
about 20% of the basin. In August, reed canary grass iinc;reased to 15%. 'The basin was covered
by approximately 10% cattail, 15% barnyard grass, and 5% green foxtail (Setaria viridis} in
August. Non-dominants covered between approximately 5 -and 25% of the basin and included the
following: starwort, commonplantain, slender rush (.Iuncus tenuis), cinquefoil, water smartweed,
dandelion, curly dock, lamb's quarters (Chenopodium album), Canada thistle (Cirsium arverrse),
white tampion (Lychnis alba), maple-leaved goosefoo~t (~~'henopodium hybridum), wood sorrel
(Oxalis stricta), bull thistle, blunt spike rush (Eleochar~is obtusa), blue vervain, tickle grass,
common ragweed, Kentucky bluegrass, and alfalfa.
Plants in the adjacent upland area that were noted included bull. thistle, curly dock, smooth sumac
(Rhos trilobata), sage (Artemisia sp.), and yarrow.
NWC-3
.This area was designed to provide 0.~0 acres of NWC credit. The desired wetland type noted in
the RPA was Type 3 palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). This
basin also appeared to be a Type 1/3 PEMA/Cx wetland' at the time of the June visitation, but lack
of hydrology caused this area to~be re-classified as Type 1 PEMA in August. In June, there was
open water ponded at about 8 inches deep covering 50% of the western portion of this area. In
August and September, there was no open water. A soil bore hole augured in the lowest part of
the basin in August revealed that there was no water to 30 inches below the soil surface.
Adjacent slopes ranged between 3:1 to greater than 3:1.
NWC-3 seemed to be divided into t«-o areas by a berms leading to a billboard on the site.
Vegetation on the western side (3 A) of this berm was f.xamined separately from vegetation on the
eastern side (3B) of this berm.
On the western side of this berm (3A), bare ground covered 30% of the basin in June and about
40% of the basin in August. Cattail coverage increased from 10% in June to 55% in August.
Non-dominant plant species covered from about 5 to 10°% of the basin and included reed canary
grass; timothy, yarrow, red top, cinquefoil, water plantain, dandelion, and fringed brome.
,r ,i
On the eastern side of this berm (3B), bare ground decreased from 50% to 5% between June and
August. Timothy i,ncrease~d from 15°o to 25%, reed canary -grass increased from 15% to 30%,
and red top increased from 15% to 2 ~°%. smartweed and cattail each covered 5% of the basin in
August. Non-dominant plant species covered about 5% of the basin and included water plantain,
yarrow, quackgrass, yellow sweet clover (~l~Ielilohrs officinale),~ Iamb's quarters, curly dock,'
Kentucky bluegrass, tickle grass,. and barnyard grass.
Upland plant species included smooth brome (Brornus ir~ermis), bull thistle, curly dock, and
yarrow.
,NWC-4
This area was designed to provide 0?6 acres of NWC credit. Z`he desired wetland type noted in
the RPA was Type 3. palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). This.
basin~appeared"to be a Type 1/3 PEI~~IA/Cx wetland at the time of`the June visitation, but lack of
hydrology caused this area to be re-classified as Type 1 PEMA in August. In June, there was
open water ponded at about 3 inches deep covering 10% of this area. Minnows were swimming
in this water in June. In August and September, there was no open water. A soil bore-hole
augured in the lowest,part of the basin in August revealed that there was no water to 39 inches
below the soil surface; the soil did start to become moist around 30 inches. Adjacent slopes were
primarily greater than 3 :1; but were closer "to 2:1 on the western side of the basin (where PVC-1
was built). Despite this steep slope, no problems associated with erosion were noted at this time.
Dry, bare ground covered most of this basin, covering an average of 65% amongst the site visits:
Reed canary grass covered about 10° o of the basin. Barnyard grass covered 25% of the basin in
August. Non-dominant species covered between 5 and 15% of this basin and included curly
dock, rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzo_ides), common mullein (~erhascum thapsus); hawk's beard
(Crepis tectorum), Kentucky bluegrass, slender rush, slender wheat grass (Agropyron
trachycaulum), quackgrass, smartweed, blunt spike rush, and a few small cattails.
Plants in the -buffer area (PVC-1) included reed Canary grass, bull thistle, common mullein, foxtail,
quackgrass, lamb's quarters, Canada thistle, and smartweed. Buffer plants seemed to be ,
becoming well established:
NWC-5
This area was designed to provide 0.39 acres of NWC credit. The desired wetland type noted in
the RPA was Type 3 palustrine,, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). This
basin appeared to be a Type 1/3 PEhL~/Cx wetland.. In June, there was open water ponded at
about 10 inches deep approximately 2 yards from the edge of ponding, covering 75% this basin.
Minnows were in the water in June. In August, this basin. was very'dry compared to the June
visit... Open water covered abort 20° 0 of the site and was ponded to about 2 inches. Much of the
soil was saturated in August. There was almost no water in this basin by September - a small pool
6 inches deep was Present next to the culvert on the south side of this basin.- Adjacent slopes ,
ranged between 3:1 to greater than 3:1.
Bare ground covered about 15% of xhis basin in June, but. this increased to 65% in August.
,~
Cattail covered about 10% of the basin in August and about 20% in September. ~ Non-dominant
-plant species covered between ~ and 10% of the basin and included soft=stem bulrush, (S'cirprrs
vcrlic/rr.3~), foxtail barley, water plantain, blunt spike rush, reed canary grass, and tickle grass.
The upland slope adjacent to the building seemed to be filling in nicely in August. Plants in this,
upland area included basswood (7ilic7 americcrraa), hawk's-beard, hoary alyssum "(Berleroa
inccrncr), rye (Secai'e cereale), timothy, quackgrass, lamb's nuarters, barnyard grass, smartweed;
Canada thistle, and common ragweed.
PRECIPITA TION ANn -BASIN C ONDITIONS '
Since these wetlandswere significantly drier than was proposed, SER felt that an examination of
precipitation would provide greater insight,as~ to whether there is a potential problem with
hydrology in these basins. An initial examination of climatological data was performed in August
and was included in the August 30, 2000, Corps version of this report. Site'conditions were
examined further during our third site visit in September. Our findings are summarized in the
sections below. '
Climatological Data -August 2000
Climatological data for the area was obtained from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport
National Weather Service station, located approximately 27 miles to the southeast of the site.
Precipitation for the month of June was 0.48 inches above normal.. Precipitation. for the month of
August up to the date of the August 10, 2000, site visit was 0.27 inches above normal. Year-to-
date precipitation for 2000 is indicated in Table 1, and it shows that precipitation was 2.56 inches
above. normal for the year. Precipitation from November 1999 to the date of the site visit is only
01.03 inches above normal in comparison.
NRCS WETS precipitation table information was used to determine which months were wetter
(in bold) or drier (in italics) than normal. This indicates that July was wetter than normal. It also
indicates that the following months were drier than normal: December and March. Please see
Table 2 for WETS normal precipitation boundaries. Although a WETS analysis could not be
done for the month of August, it seems that August precipitation is close to normal.
By looking at the precipitation data, it seems that precipitation during most of the growing season
was either normal or wetter than normal. Precipitation during the preceding winter months '
(November 1999 through April 2000), however, was generally lower than normal, about 2.30
inchesless than average. Since winter precipitation can be crucial for recharging basin hydrology,
through spring runoff, it is possible-that low winter precipitation is at least partly the cause of the
dryness of these mitigation basins. Early in the growing season, snowmelt from winter months
becomes runoff and there is very little upland infiltration since frozen soil will act like an
impermeable surface: Therefore, runoff from precipitation in winter months typically flows to low
lying areas once melting begins in early spring. After the soil thaws, surface runoff is much lower
since water can once again infiltrate the soil. As mentioned before; this winter precipitation was
low, a deficit of over 2 inches. This deficit, in a 10 acre watershed, would cause anapproximately
3 acre-foot reduction in the runoff that recharges the basins in spring. This would result ~in there
- being an average of 3 feet less water in a 1 acre wetland:
i ms tame: bas been corrected since the August 30, 2000, report was produced. Discrepancies in the NWS data
were found since the August report was distributed.
Based on~a 30-year average (1961-1990).
Numbers in italics refer to drier than normal .months. Numbers in bold' refer to wetter than no~tial months.
See Table 2 for NRCS WETS boundaries.
"'" Data only includes precipitation for this month prior to the site visit.
"""Data at upper bound of normal.
i- .t
Table 2.
311% Chance 311% Chance
Month Lower Bound" Upper Bound"'
November 0.71 1.90
December 0.62 1.32
January 0.52 1.17
Febni:iry " ~ 0.46 1.08
March 1-.32 ~ 2.32
April 1.49 2.97
May 2.3 3 4.05
June 2.3 8 4.92
July 2.09 4.29
August 2.46 4.32
' Calculated by MRCS and based on a 30-year average (1961-1990).
All values between the two bounds indicate normal precipitation for that month
" Monthly precipitation values < the 30% chance lower bound indicate a drier than average month.
"'Monthly precipitation values >-the 30% chance upper bound indicate a wetter than average month.
Site Examination ,- September 2000 ,
At SER's third site visit for this year on'September 28, 2000, Jim Smart from our staff examined
the culvert and ditch on the east side of the property, near County Road 19, which proeides
hydrology for these basins by delivering backwater-from off-site lakes (i.e., School Lake and Mud
Lake) into the wetlands. At this time, he found that the ditch between the basins and School Lake
was dry all the way between the property and the lake (Photos 8 ,and 9 in the photo log). In
addition, School Lake appeared to be at an unusually low water level (Photo 10).
In the August 30,-2000, Corps report, we hypothesized that if the culvert and ditch were dry that
downstream ditch improvements may be removing water from the site more efficiently than in the
past. However, School Lake,was also drier than normal. Thus, it is very possible that a lack of
precipitation, as mentioned above, is causing~the hydrology problems with the onsite basins:
Conclusions
Type 3 PEMC basins, the target'wetland type for all basins in this project, often have ponded
- water during the months when we performed site visitations, although haling a dry Type- 3 PEMC
wetland at this time of year is not atypical (PEMC wetlands are seasonally flooded by definition).
It should bekept in mind that these basins are still young, and a definite determination regarding
the adequacy of basin hydrology cannot be made at thistime. SER will pay special attention to
-~ ~, -
hydrology conditions in fhe future to ensure that they are adequate.for wetland formation, and will ,
recommend corrective measures if necessary. In addition, these areas will be examined earlier in
the season (April or May) next year to assist in determining if hydrology in these basins is
_ " adequate.
MANAGEMENT CONCERNS AND CONCI US'IONS
There are two main topics of concern regarding this project:
• As mentioned above, based on our observations of the replacement wetlands this-past
year, it appears that'most of the areas are drier than what was proposed; however, they
are still young wetlands. These basins will be examined earlier in the season next year
(April or May 2001) to monitor early post-snowmelt conditions.
• Reed canary grass is beginning to pioneer most of the created basins: Since reed canary
grass is so invasive, there is a possibility of it crowding out more desirable vegetation in
the future. However, it is also rather ubiquitous in the surrounding areas (e.g., the
wetlands that remained on the site after the construction of the buildings), so control may.
be difficult: Two control possibilities include spraying these areas in early spring, using
Rodeo before late season (i.e., flowering) plants emerge; onto check its spread by
competition with other plant species. SER will be doing follow-up work with regards to
the client .and the reed canary grass presence at this site. -
Based on our observations; it was quite apparent that all replacement wetlands and, all wetland
.buffer seeding areas did exist at the time of the visit. The mitigated wetlands will. continue to be
monitored according to the monitoring plan outlined in the Wetland Replacement Plan
Application and the Corps permit issued i"or this site. The actual wetland area will be measured
using sub-meter accuracy GPS (Global Positioning System) equipment in spring 2001. _
If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this site, please feel free to
contact us at (952) 471-1100. Thank you. ,
Sincerely,
Svoboda Ecological Resources .
~`!
". Franklin J. Svoboda, CWB; PWS Laura E. Peck
President Wetland Ecologist
cc: Robert Morse, JMJ Properties
Gary Elftmann, USACE
1-
~ _. ~
Photo Log
PHOTO LOG OF SITE
~,
Svoboda Ecological Resources Minneapolis Factory Shopper
PHOTO 1: NWC-1, Facing E. This matches Photo 2 from the 1999 report.
PHOTO 2: NWC-2, Facing NW.
1 y~ `
PHOTO LOG OF SITE
0
Svoboda Ecological Resources Minneapolis Factory Shoppes
PHOTO 3: NWC-3A, Facing W.
PHOTO 4: NWC-3B, Facing W. Note berm in background. NWC-3A lies to the W.
PHOTO LOG OF SITE
f Svoboda Ecological Resources Minneapolis Factory Shoppes
PHOTO 5: NWC-4, Facing SE. Note culvert to the left.
PHOTO 6: NWC-5, Facing W. This Matches Photo 3 from the 1999 report.
~ !! ~,
PHOTO LOG OF SITE
s
Svoboda Ecological Resources U of M Wildlife Rehab Center
PHOTO 7: NWC-5, Facing N. This matches Photo 6 from the
1999 report. Note culvert to the right.
M ~ f
PHOTO 9: The ditch that leads to the on-
site wetlands, at the connection of School
Lake. Note the dryness of the ditch and the
layer of duckweed showing the movement
of the receding water.
PHOTO 8: The ditch that leads to the
onsite wetlands, and the culvert on the
west side of CR 19. Note the dryness of
the ditch.
PHOTO LOG OF SITE
s
Svoboda Ecological Resources Minneapolis Factory Shopper