HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.b. Wetland Ordinance TA & PlanEXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Planning Commission Regular Meeting: March 30, 2021
Tentative City Council Meeting: TBD
AGENDA ITEM: 21-09-TA and 21-10-TA Comprehensive
Wetland Management Plan Update and
Wetland Ordinance Text Amendment.
AGENDA SECTION:
Public Hearing
PREPARED BY: Anthony Nemcek, Planner AGENDA NO. 5.b. & 6.a.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Comprehensive Wetland
Management Plan Update; Draft Wetland
Overlay Ordinance
APPROVED BY: LM
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to recommend the City Council approve the Comprehensive Wetland Management
Plan Update.
Motion to recommend the City Council approve the Text Amendment to Section 11-7-3:
Wetland Overlay Regulations.
SUMMARY
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider an update to the City’s Comprehensive Wetland
Management Plan (CWMP) and a text amendment to update a section of the zoning ordinance that
regulates activities that may impact wetlands. The CWMP was originally approved in 1998 to preserve,
protect, enhance, or mitigate impacts to wetlands. The City has updated the plan 5 times since its original
approval. Staff is recommending the plan be updated again to incorporate revisions to the Wetland
Conservation Act and to include lessons learned since the last update in 2013. In addition to the plan
update, staff is also asking the Commission to review a text amendment to Section 11-7-3: Wetland
Overlay Regulations to give the City the Authority to enforce the regulations in the CWMP as currently
that section of the zoning ordinance is severely outdated and obsolete. Following review by the Planning
Commission, the plan will undergo a 60-day review by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
to determine if the update is considered minor. Staff anticipates it will be deemed a minor update, after
which a public hearing will be held by the City Council before taking final action on the plan and the
ordinance text amendment.
BACKGROUND
Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan Update
The Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan was first approved by the City in 1998. Since its original
approval the plan has been updated five times to incorporate changes to the Wetland Conservation Act
and also to include best practices to preserve and protect wetlands within the City of Rosemount. This
most recent update addresses a number of key issues, some of which are listed below:
•wetland buffer regulations were expanded to cover all wetlands vs. only those associated with a
zoning application,
•outdated rules and language have been updated,
2
• unnecessary or inapplicable details were removed,
• wetland replacement processes have been updated to reflect staff’s experience with prior
implementation.
Additionally, the City’s wetland inventory was updated through this process. The biggest change is the
incorporation of language from the CWMP into zoning ordinance to make the rules in the plan
enforceable by the City.
Wetland Overlay District Ordinance
Currently the Wetland Overlay District Ordinance contains language that was adopted in 1989 and is no
longer relevant. Staff has been relying on the language within the Surface Water Management section of
the City Code that requires consistency with the CWMP to apply the requirements of the plan to new
developments within the City. Incorporating the regulations of the CWMP into the actual zoning
ordinance will give staff greater ability to protect and preserve all wetlands within the City.
The proposed amendment to the Wetland Overlay District regulations is consistent with the CWMP.
Some of the sections within the proposed amendment include a wetland classification used to determine
the requirements to manage and protect a particular wetland, the process for submitting applications for
activities that may have an impact on wetlands, the required minimum buffer around a wetland based on
its classification, and what type of stormwater pretreatment is required before discharging into a wetland.
The amendment also contains an exemption from many of the wetland overlay requirements for lots that
were created prior to 1998, when the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan was first adopted. In
those cases, a natural, unmowed vegetative buffer of fifteen (15) feet is still required around the edge of
the wetland regardless of that wetland’s classification.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
If approved, the CWMP will be in greater conformance with the federal Wetland Conservation Act, the
wetland inventory will be brought up to date, and wetland impacts will be more effectively and efficiently
mitigated. Adoption of the text amendment to the Wetland Overlay Ordinance will allow staff to enforce
the regulations and standards contained within the CWMP to protect and preserve the numerous wetlands
within Rosemount. Staff is recommending approval of the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan
and a text amendment to Section 11-7-3: Wetland Overlay Regulations.
Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan
ADOPTED 1998
AMENDED FEBRUARY 1999
AMENDED DECEMBER 2005
AMENDED DECEMBER 2007
AMENDED FEBRUARY 2013
AMENDED MARCH 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE NO.
I. Executive Summary .............................................................................................................1
II. Introduction and Purpose .....................................................................................................2
III. Definitions and References ..................................................................................................5
IV. Wetland Regulations ............................................................................................................8
V. Technical Elements ............................................................................................................10
VI. Functional Assessment.......................................................................................................12
VII. Wetland Classification .......................................................................................................13
VIII. Wetland Management Policies ..........................................................................................14
IX. Wetland Replacement ........................................................................................................20
X. Replacement Wetland and Buffer Monitoring and Standards ...........................................21
A. Monitoring ................................................................................................................................21
XI. New Wetlands ....................................................................................................................24
APPENDIX A – ASSESSMENT RESULTS ................................................................................25
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Assessment Results
Appendix B – City Council Resolution
Page 1
March 2021
I. Executive Summary
Wetlands within the City of Rosemount are regulated through Wetland Overlay District Section
11-7-3 of Title 11 Zoning Regulations of the City Code. The Wetland Overlay District is
intended impose restrictions in addition to those required by the underlying zoning for the
protection of wetlands.
The Rosemount Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan (WMP or Plan) is an
inventory/assessment of wetlands in Rosemount combined with a plan designed to maximize the
benefit that surface waters can provide to the community. This Plan is intended to guide and
supplement the regulations within the Wetland Overlay District. The wetland map of the City is
available on the City’s website .
Wetlands have been prioritized for management based on the assessed functional score and
guidance has been developed for wetland management based on these scores.
This Plan has been reviewed and revised the past several years to address changes in State
Wetland Conservation Act Rules. The Plan has also been further refined through lessons learned
and interpretation of the guidance during implementation.
The policies within this WMP apply to wetlands and projects that will be reviewed through a site
development process and are subject to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Wetlands that are not
subject to site development review but rather are associated with individual lot activities or
require a zoning permit will be subject to the Wetland Overlay District.
Page 2
March 2021
II. Introduction and Purpose
The City of Rosemount’s Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan (WMP) was developed in
1998 to be in conformance with Minnesota Rules 8420. The purpose of establishing the WMP
was to develop policies related to the use and protection of wetlands within the City when and if
development occurred. The purpose of the WMP is to provide the City with additional guidance
and policy related to wetland protection, impacts, and mitigation based on the needs of the
community.
The WMP was also designed to provide information to land developers and the public regarding
the amount, characteristics, and value of local wetlands and surface water. This WMP exists for
the purpose of optimizing the City’s surface water resources as provided under the Minnesota
Wetland Conservation Act. The goals of this Plan are to:
• Determine the quantity and quality of the wetland resources in Rosemount.
• Map wetlands at a scale appropriate for local planning purposes.
• Maintain data for use by residents and developers.
• Focus limited resources in the most effective direction.
• Solve chronic wetland management problems.
• Identify key educational areas.
• Achieve no net loss in the quantity, quality, functionality, and biological diversity of
Rosemount’s existing wetlands.
• Increase the quantity, quality, functionality, and biological diversity of Rosemount’s
wetlands by enhancing diminished or drained wetlands where feasible.
• Avoid direct or indirect impacts from activities that destroy or diminish the quantity,
quality, and biological diversity of wetlands.
• Replace wetland values where avoidance of activity is not feasible and prudent.
• Optimize management of City surface water and wetland by integrating all surface water
related management plans and ordinances.
• To identify existing and potential problems or opportunities for protection, management,
and development of water resources and related land resources in the County.
• To develop and implement a plan of action to promote sound management of water
resources in the City.
Page 3
March 2021
• Provide performance standards for wetland replacement areas, including the associated
upland buffer.
Over the past decade, the City has seen a consistent level of development of residential and
commercial development. City-wide, the available supply of developable land has steadily
diminished and new development over the next two decades is projected to occur at the
University of Minnesota’s UMore Park and the largely undeveloped southeast portion of the
City. New growth and land development have put great pressure on the quality and benefits
associated with the City’s surface water resources. The total wetland area in Rosemount covers
about 1,832 acres, or about 8% of the City. About 1,174 of these acres are associated with the
Mississippi River corridor. Most of the remaining 658 acres include about 400 other surface
water bodies in Rosemount which are small to medium sized pothole wetlands lying within the
City’s northwest corner. Here a swath of the Wisconsin Age, St. Croix Moraine has left behind a
hilly terrain with many potholes and small enclosed watersheds. Just north across Rosemount’s
border within the City of Eagan is the Lebanon Hills Regional Park which takes advantage of
this interesting terrain for education and recreation.
Wetlands within the City were assessed in 1997 and 1998 as a part of the WMP Plan
development. This field assessment focused on the undeveloped Municipal Urban Service Area
(MUSA) identified in the 2020 Land Use Plan. These properties have a greater density of
wetlands and surface waters than other areas of the City and are expected to have the highest
potential for wetland impacts from development. The functional classification of several
wetlands have been updated using MnRAM results provided by applicants through the WCA
approval process. Original assessment scores have been archived and can be provided upon
request. The updated assessments and wetlands map are available on the City’s website.
The City has applied the WMP policies on all land development in the City of Rosemount since
the adoption of the plan in 1998. Wetland buffer zone monuments installed with new
development have contributed to the public education portion of the WMP. Buffer zones
themselves have increased in overall area and vegetation density. Wetland monitoring provides
the City with technical data on mitigation sites. The data are reviewed to ensure that the
appropriate wetland type and functionality are attained. The City’s Erosion and Sediment
Control policy has helped to prevent soil erosion and deposition impacts to wetlands adjacent to
construction.
Based on the implementation of this Plan since 1998 and subsequent amendments, it has been
determined by the City that a number of policy clarifications were needed. The purpose of this
Plan amendment is to address the following issues:
• Wetland buffer zones and related policies.
• Wetland replacement regulations and procedures.
• Changes to the WCA over the years.
• Incorporate the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) as a replacement for
the RoseWFA for wetland functions and values assessments.
• Establish clear administrative authority for WCA decisions.
• Provide updated functional assessment information (MnRAM) of several wetlands.
Page 4
March 2021
The WMP provides greater flexibility and control over wetland management and protection to
meet the specific needs and goals of the community. The Plan was developed in recognition of
the City of Rosemount’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This document has been developed to be in
conformance with the Wetland Conservation Act. Any future changes in the WCA would
supersede the requirements outlined in this plan.
Page 5
March 2021
III. Definitions and References
Applicant: Person or party proposing wetland impact or related activity.
Best management practices: State-approved and practices published in the “Protecting Water
Quality in Urban Areas” associated with draining, filling, or replacing wetlands that are capable
of preventing and minimizing degradation of surface water and groundwater. The “Protecting
Water Quality in Urban Areas” manual is written and produced by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency.
City: The incorporated City of Rosemount.
Complete Application: An application, as defined in MnRule 8420 that meets the requirements
as per MnRule 8420.0255, Subp. 2 Determination of a Complete Application and contains
sufficient and technically accurate information required to make a decision, as determined by the
City. An application may be deemed incomplete if it contains information that does not support
the conclusions on which the application is based and for which a decision has been requested.
Creation: Construction of wetlands in an area that was not wetlands in the past.
Excavation: The displacement or removal of the sediment or other materials by any method.
Fill: As defined in MnRule 8420.
Growing Season: As defined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Midwest Region.
Hydric soils: Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season
to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part.
Hydrophytic vegetation: Macrophytic plant life growing in water, soil, or on a substrate that is
at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content.
Impact: As defined in MnRule 8420.
Indirect impact: An impact that is a result of an activity that occurs outside of the wetland
boundary (MM Rule 8420) including, but not limited to, impacts associated with altering the
hydrologic inputs to a wetland basin that results in converting the wetland to nonwetland or
changing the wetland type. Indirect impacts are determined on a per-project basis and shall be
evaluated by the City and in consultation with the Technical Evaluation Panel, at the discretion
of the City.
Landowner: A person or entity having the rights necessary to drain or fill a wetland, or to
establish and maintain a replacement or banked wetland. Typically, the landowner is a fee title
owner or a holder of an easement, license, lease, or rental agreement providing the necessary
rights. The right must not be limited by a lien or other encumbrance that could override the
obligations assumed with the replacement or banking of a wetland.
Page 6
March 2021
Local government unit: The City of Rosemount.
Project: A specific plan, contiguous activity, proposal, or design necessary to accomplish a goal
as defined by the local government unit. As used in this chapter, a project may not be split into
components or phases for the sole purpose of gaining additional exemptions.
Public value of wetlands: The public benefit and use of wetlands as determined based upon a
functional assessment method.
Soil and water conservation district: A legal subdivision of state government under Minnesota
Statutes, chapter 103C.
Upland Buffer Credit: For the purposes of this Plan, Upland Buffer Credit shall incorporate the
requirements and standards of MnRule 8420.0526, Subp. 2.
Wetlands:
A. Lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually
at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. For purposes of this Plan
wetlands must:
(1) Have a predominance of hydric soils;
(2) Be inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions; and
(3) Under normal circumstances, support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation.
B. The wetland size is the area within its boundary. The boundary must be determined
according to the United States Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual
(January 1987). The wetland type must be determined according to United States Fish
and Wildlife Service Circular No. 39 (1971 edition).
Wetland Buffer Zone Setback: A 30-foot minimum distance from the buffer edge in which a
structure cannot be built.
Wetland Buffer Zones (Buffer Zone): Non-wetland areas, which extend a specified distance
from the wetland edge, that are established in conservation easement during development. The
Wetland Buffer Zone width is based on the functional assessment results for wetlands subject to
development and the Comprehensive Plan. Wetland Buffer Zones are undeveloped, un-
manicured, and minimally maintained terrestrial areas of native or naturally occurring vegetation
that experience little to no human impact. Wetland Buffer Zones help to protect adverse impacts
to the wetland. Restrictions apply to the activities within a Wetland Buffer Zone once a buffer
zone is established. The Wetland Buffer Zone starts at the delineated wetland edge.
Wetland Buffer Zone Averaging: Practice of allowing a variable width buffer zone around a
wetland where the average buffer zone width is equal to the buffer zone width required for the
wetland management category. Buffer zone averaging shall incorporate landscape connectivity
where possible and ecologically feasible. Some examples include, but are not limited to, the
following: a) averaging the buffer zone to be wider around the portion of the wetland where
upstream development will occur; b) incorporating landscape features that may be prone to
Page 7
March 2021
erosion to maintain a vegetated area and prevent sedimentation into the wetland; c) incorporating
a higher quality habitat to protect the area from disturbance.
Wetland Replacement Credit: For the purposes of this Plan, Wetland Replacement Credit shall
mean the Actions Eligible for Credit, as per MM Rule 8420.0526, Subp. 3-7.
References
• Eggers, Steve D. and Donald Reed, Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and
Wisconsin, US Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul MN, (1987).
• Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Field Guide,
(1997).
• Minnesota Storm Water Advisory Group, Buffer Zones, Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, (September 1997).
• Minnesota Storm Water Advisory Group, Storm-Water and Wetlands: Planning and
Evaluation Guidelines for Addressing Potential Impacts of Urban Storm-Water and Snow-
Melt Runoff on Wetlands, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, (June 1997).
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Wetlands of the United States, United States Fish
and Wildlife Service Circular No. 39, (1971).
• United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wetland Delineation Manual, (1987).
• U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W.
Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-16. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center.
• Cowardin, et al., Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States,
(1979).
• Board of Water and Soil Resources, Minnesota Routine Assessment Methodology for
Evaluating Wetland Functions, Version 3.4 beta – November (2010).
• National Wetland Inventory Maps United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Page 8
March 2021
IV. Wetland Regulations
The existing wetland regulatory framework in Minnesota involves a number of federal, state, and
local agencies including the US Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Natural Resources,
Pollution Control Agency, and the Local Government Units. A brief discussion of the role of
each wetland regulatory agency is included in this section.
A. US Army Corps of Engineers
The US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) regulates the discharge of dredged or fill materials
to wetlands and other water bodies through Section 404 of the Clean Water Act provided
there is a connection to navigable waters. Any impact to navigable waters or wetlands that
are connected to navigable waters, including filling, draining, or excavation, may require a
permit from the COE. Wetland delineations are also subject to COE approval. Depending on
the size and extent of the wetland impact, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency may be
involved in providing water quality certification for the COE permit.
B. Department of Natural Resources
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has jurisdiction over Public Waters and
Wetlands as depicted on the DNR Public Waters and Wetland maps. The DNR has
jurisdiction over Public Water and Wetlands below the Ordinary High Water (OHW)
elevation or below the top-of-bank for streams. The OHW is determined by the DNR. Any
impact to a Public Water or Wetland may require a permit from the DNR.
C. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) water quality standards applicable to wetland
protection are contained in Minnesota Rules 7050. Water quality standards are applicable to
all wetlands of the state and sequencing requirements of Minnesota Rule 7050.0186 apply to
all wetland alterations that are permitted or certified by the MPCA as described below.
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)/SDS permit program is a
delegated federal permit issued under the responsibilities and authorities contained in
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 115. In accordance with Minnesota Rule 7050.0186, sequencing
requirements to avoid, minimize, and mitigate wetland impacts are required to be satisfied in
the issuance of NPDES/SDS permits, including issuance of the general Construction Storm
Water NPDES permits. If a project includes a physical wetland alteration caused by draining,
filling, excavation, or inundation of the wetland and that impact is not addressed in either the
US Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit, the Department of Natural Resources permit, or the
Wetland Conservation Act permit, then mitigation compliance with Minnesota Rule
7050.0186 must be demonstrated. For the purposes of the MPCA NPDES permit, de minimis
determinations by another permitting agency that address the project impacts are recognized
by the MPCA. However, a non-jurisdictional determination by another permitting agency
that does not address project impacts requires the project proposer to demonstrate that they
meet the NPDES permit conditions and Minnesota Rule 7050.0186.
D. Local Government Unit (LGU)
The Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) is a state law enacted in 1991 and subsequently
amended (Minnesota Laws CH 354, Minnesota Statute 103G.222-2373 and other scattered
sections). The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) provides agency oversight for
Page 9
March 2021
WCA through Minnesota Rule 8420. The WCA is administered by Local Government Units
(LGU). BWSR’s role is to assist LGUs in the implementation of WCA and to be a member
of the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP).
The WCA is administered by the LGUs. The City of Rosemount is the LGU for the WCA
within the City’s political boundary. The City can issue or deny permits depending on
whether or not the project is in conformance the WCA and the requirements of this Plan.
The intent of the WCA is to achieve a “No Net Loss” of wetlands in Minnesota. Therefore,
the WCA prohibits filling, draining, and excavating of wetlands in some areas unless the
activity is exempt, or wetlands are replaced by restoration or creation of wetland of at least
equal functions and values.
E. Wetland Applications
Wetland related applications shall be submitted to the City of Rosemount per the
requirements of the Wetland Overlay District Ordinance Subsection 11-7-3 D.
F. Wetland Application and Decision Procedures
Application review and decision procedures by the LGU shall follow the requirements as per
MnRule 8420.0255, as amended, and those procedures are included by reference. Once the
comment period has ended, the City will make a decision on the application within 60 days
of receiving a complete application in accordance with MnRules 8420.0230 Subp. 2. If the
60-day process cannot be accommodated due to the timing of the preliminary plat process or
outlying information, the process will follow Minnesota Statute 15.99 (the “60-day rule”).
Once a decision is made, the City will send a Notice of Decision to all who received a
summary or copy of the permit application. The City’s decision is then effective, and the
project can commence provided that replacement of the wetland impacts occurs before or
concurrently with the wetland impact, all other permits from other agencies have been
obtained, and that the conditions, if any, of the Notice of Decision are fully met. There is a
30-day appeal process in MnRule Chapter 8420. The applicant can begin work during this
appeal window at its own risk. If the LGU’s decision is appealed, work on the project would
be suspended until the appeal process is resolved. See Section H, below, for appeal
procedures.
G. Local Government Unit Decision Authority Summary
Wetland application decision authority is outlined in the Wetland Overlay District Ordinance
Subsection 11-7-3 E.
H. Appeals of Wetland Application Decisions and Enforcement Procedures
Appeals of exemption, no-loss, wetland boundary, wetland type, sequencing, replacement
plan, or banking plan decisions made by the City will follow the appeal process in
accordance with MnRule 8420, as amended.
Wetland Conservation Act Enforcement procedures shall be in conformance with MnRule
8420.
Page 10
March 2021
V. Technical Elements
A. Wetland/Surface Water Inventory
Wetlands were identified based on instructions in the “Minnesota Wetland Delineation
Field Guide”. Included in field documentation is notation on hydrology, size, vegetation
and soils, several photographs, and Dakota County topographic half-section map
locations.
This field reconnaissance was carried out in 1997 and 1998 by the City’s Water
Resources Engineer with assistance from interns trained and supervised by the former.
The database was set up using the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) compiled in 1987
using aerial photography. The database was then modified with any changes found by
field inspection during the spring, summer and fall of 1997 and spring of 1998. Wetlands
found by field inspection that were not listed in the NWI have been added. Wetland
determinations were arrived at using the three defining factors for a wetland, Hydrology,
Vegetation, and Soils. Each of these parameters needs to be present before an area could
be determines as “wetland” according to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Manual for
Delineating Wetlands.
B. Field Methods
Various resources were utilized both in the office and in the field to determine possible
wetland sites. Initially, 1991 topographic maps were used in conjunction with the NWI
map to locate wetlands in the City. Next, 1991 aerial photographs were viewed to locate
low and possible water holding areas. The last step in the office reconnaissance was to
check the local soils map for hydric (wetland) soils. After these preparatory steps were
taken, the field work was undertaken. All areas were covered on foot, and low areas or
areas with one of the three wetland indicators (hydrology, soils, and vegetation) were
tested. Areas that tested as wetlands were documented on field data sheets as well as
sketched onto topographic maps for approximate representation of size. Photographs
were taken of the wetland sites as well. Precise delineations of wetlands are left to be
completed by property owners, as the need arises.
C. Database Information
Using the information collected during field work, wetlands were categorized using the
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NWI classification systems. This information was
then entered into the wetland database. The database shows Rosemount’s wetland
number, size, FWS type, DNR number, and other relevant information (see the map on
the City’s website). This information is directly linked to the Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) map which shows all of the wetlands in Rosemount that were identified in
the inventory process. The inventory does not include all surface water features with the
City of Rosemount. Wetland features of the GIS system are visual representations of the
identified wetlands and do not represent the actual wetland delineation.
Page 11
March 2021
D. Geographic Information Systems Map
Polygon coverage using the program Arcview was linked to the tabular data in the
Microsoft Access Database with a common identifier. Polygons representing the shape of
the wetlands were drawn using contour and parcel coverages as a backdrop. The overall
process was used to create a digital map that can be accessed with ease to locate wetlands
throughout the City of Rosemount. Maps can be generated and database information
about the wetlands can be viewed. The GIS maps are updated seasonally to account for
wetland impact activity and monitoring accomplished for that season. New and
replacement wetlands will be incorporated in the GIS database and City map as they are
established. The functionality and classification will be updated based on the monitoring
information provided to the City. The GIS map will also be updated to reflect new
information (i.e., wetland delineation decisions, revised management classifications, etc.)
on an as needed basis. For example, each year the City has received applications for
wetland boundary decisions that have resulted, upon review and approval by the City, in
several features identified in the WMP as wetland being determined to be non-wetland.
These features have been removed from the Plan and as such, are not regulated by the
policies herein. As a part of this 2020 update, the polygons and attribute table of the
inventory’s GIS shapefile have been updated and an updated inventory map is on the
City’s website.
Page 12
March 2021
VI. Functional Assessment
The functional value of each wetland was evaluated in 1997-1998 with respect to the following
functional parameters:
• Floral diversity and integrity
• Water quality protection
• Fish and wildlife habitat
• Flood/storm water attenuation
• Shoreline protection
• Groundwater recharge and discharge
• Aesthetic/recreation/education and science
• Commercial uses
Wetland functionality was assessed in 1997 according to a modified version of the Minnesota
Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) referred to as the Rosemount Wetland Functional
Assessment (RoseWFA) worksheet . It was developed in 1997 in consultation with the
Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,
the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, the Rosemount Wetland Committee,
and City staff.
The 2012 Plan Amendment replaced RoseWFA with them most current version of MnRAM. The
MnRAM has become the state standard for wetland assessments. MnRAM is a comprehensive
assessment of both a wetland’s function and value and can be directly associated with WCA
policies in implementing this Plan.
The City’s wetland inventory has not been fully updated using MnRAM, but upon application of
a proposed or planned plat or any other development of a site or property, the City will require
that the applicant complete a re-assessment of the wetlands using the most current version of
MnRAM. MnRAM results from applicants will be added to the City’s wetland inventory on an
annual basis and will replace functional assessment values from the RoseWFA. This is in
addition to the wetland delineation report that is required to be submitted if the site is proposed
to be developed. Field work must be completed during the growing season as defined in this
Plan, which is generally May 1 – October 15, but may fall outside of this date range depending
on climate conditions.
Page 13
March 2021
VII. Wetland Classification
Wetlands are classified for management and protection based on the “Basic Wetland Protection”
management strategy in MnRAM. The classification system guidance can be found at
https://bwsr.state.mn.us/wetland-functional-assessment. A map of the City’s wetlands is on the
City’s webpage and their classifications can be found in Appendix A. The management
classifications and corresponding functional scores are as follows:
Preserve (P): Wetlands that were placed into the Preserve category generally provided
the highest functions for vegetative diversity and wildlife habitat.
Manage 1 (M1): Wetlands that were placed into the Manage 1 category generally
provided high functions for vegetative diversity and wildlife habitat with some functions
for water quality protection and flood attenuation.
Manage 2 (M2): Wetlands that were placed into the Manage 2 category generally
provided some functions for vegetative diversity and wildlife habitat with high functions
for water quality protection and flood attenuation.
Manage 3 (M3): Wetlands that were placed into the Manage 3 category generally
provided the functions for water quality protection and flood attenuation.
Appeal of a Management Classification: In the event of a dispute concerning wetland
management classification, the applicant or project proposer will be required to submit a
MnRAM to the LGU. The appeal must include the wetland number, current classification,
MnRAM results, and reason(s) for the appeal. The LGU will review the wetland and MnRAM
results and may request input from the Technical Evaluation Panel. A decision will be made
based on a review of the information within 30 days during the growing season or 30 days after
the growing season begins, if the request for appeal is submitted outside of the growing season.
A notice of the City’s decision on the management classification appeal will be sent to the
appealing party and the regulatory agencies. This notice will indicate either the revised
management classification (if the City concurs with the appeal) or the existing management
classification and the management and protection strategies assigned to the wetland by support
of this document. Staff will make a decision within 60 days of receiving a complete request of
appeal (or within the appropriate time period after the growing season begins if the application
was submitted outside of the growing season) and notify the applicant of the decision. Appeals of
the LGU’s decision can be made to the City Council.
Page 14
March 2021
VIII. Wetland Management Policies
A. General Water Quality Practices
For wetlands Citywide, several tools can be applied with minimal expense. The City shall
maintain its regularly scheduled program of street sweeping and storm drain sump
cleaning. City streets are swept twice yearly and catch basin sumps are cleaned
seasonally based on the schedule of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
(SWPPP). These programs can have a significant impact on wetland water quality by
removing sediments and chemicals from the storm water runoff that enters surface water
bodies.
The Engineering Department and Building Inspections currently maintain a general
erosion control inspection and enforcement program. The goal of this program is to
minimize transport of sediments eroded from construction sites to surface water bodies.
This program is supported by language in the City’s Surface Water Management
Ordinance as well as the Uniform Building Code for the State of Minnesota. This
program is continually being reviewed and improved to minimize the impact to water
quality of storm water runoff.
In compliance with state requirements, the City has developed and implemented a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) which focuses on the preventative
aspects of storm water pollution. The SWPPP is a combination of Best Management
Practices (BMPs), ordinance, and public education tools used to prevent storm water
pollution. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requires the City of
Rosemount submit an annual report with results and summaries of the actions taken for
the previous year.
In order to organize and implement Rosemount’s Wetland and Surface Water
Management Plan, an ordinance has been developed under Minnesota Statute Chapter
462. This ordinance is available on the City’s webpage.
Efforts to educate residents regarding wetland ecosystems and best management practices
are ongoing and will continue. Along with dissemination of surface water specific
information, programs that will encourage direct action on the part of residents, such as
the Citizens Assisted Monitoring Program (CAMP) will be discussed by City staff. The
City will continue to promote and sponsor an “Adopt-A-Wetland” program. This will
enlist volunteers to collect litter and trash that accumulates around and within City
wetlands as well as addressing other needs as they develop. Other educational
opportunities will be actively sought.
B. Category Specific Management Strategies
The inventory and functional assessment information was used to determine management
categories for individual wetlands based on functional level. Wetlands that score highest
are targeted for maximum protection and resource dedication. The wetland category
management strategies were designed to optimize resource allocation. The goal of this
Plan is to devote resources in a manner that optimizes the overall functional value of
wetlands to the community and the natural ecosystem. This Plan does not “roll back” any
Page 15
March 2021
protection for wetlands existing under state or federal law but rather specifies proactive
management strategies scaled to the current functional levels of Rosemount wetlands.
The management strategies call for increasing levels of protection for wetlands that score
high in the functional assessment. In terms of actual management practices these different
levels are implemented through buffer zones, storm water treatment, mitigation
requirements, and public education.
1. Wetland Buffer Zones and Prioritization
Buffer establishment applies to any property in which an application has been required
under Subsection 11-7-3 B of the Wetland Overlay District Ordinance and has been
determined to have a wetland that has been classified under Subsection 11-7-3 C of the
Wetland Overlay District Ordinance.
Wetland buffer zones are upland areas that contain natural areas of vegetation designated
by a LGU to protect the ecological values and functions of the aquatic system. Buffer
zone functions include:
• Stabilizing soils and preventing erosion
• Filtering suspended solids and nutrients
• Supporting and protecting fish and wildlife habitat
• Encouraging the production of unique vegetation
• Stabilizing water temperature
• Deterring human encroachment
• Provide habitat connections for wildlife
Dense native vegetation is the optimal condition for an effective wetland buffer zone.
Once established, activities in buffer zones that are not associated with the approved
buffer zone management plan that disturb the roots or influence the growth of the
vegetation, such as grading, mowing, landscaping and planting, fertilizing, spraying
(herbicides), and seeding or sodding are prohibited. Herbicides and controlled burns or
other management practices used to control noxious weeds or invasive species will be
allowed only with permission from the City Engineer. Enhancement of the buffer zone
through installation of additional native plantings is allowed and encouraged.
The width of buffer zone considered appropriate to protect a wetland from degradation is
related to the wetland functions being protected and the buffer zone functions being
provided. Buffer zone widths for each management category are outlined below and
described in Table IX-1. Additional buffer zone may be required above and beyond the
prescribed width if determined necessary and feasible by the City Engineer.
Preserve: 75 feet
Manage 1: 50 feet
Manage 2: 30 feet
Manage 3: 15 feet (non-agricultural areas)
Page 16
March 2021
In addition to the buffer zone widths, the City requires a 30-foot structure setback from
the buffer to allow for usable yard space per Subsection 11-7-3 G.4 of the Wetland
Overlay District Ordinance.
Buffer zones will be contained within a conservation easement that includes both the
wetland and the buffer zone per Subsection 11-7-3 G.5 of the Wetland Overlay District
Ordinance. A sample of the City’s conservation easement can be obtained from the City.
The conservation easements will be recorded with the final plat and must be indicated on
subsequent land development plans. The extent of the conservation easement will be
determined based on the prescribed buffer zone width for the wetland in question and/or
the outer limits of an approved averaged wetland buffer zone. These easements provide
the City with a legal right to the property and the ability to enforce the wetland buffer
zone requirements as outlined in this document.
All project reviews will need to take into account a buffer zone prioritization review. This
prioritization review involves the following and is required to be in an application when
required under Subsection 11-7-3 B of the Wetland Overlay District Ordinance.
a) Projects shall include the buffer zone and setback zone standards. However,
no wetlands shall be filled or impacted in order to provide for the appropriate
buffer zone.
b) In cases where meeting the setback standard causes impact to the wetland or
the buffer zone, flexibility on the wetland setback will be considered.
c) In cases where meeting the buffer zone standard causes impact to the wetland,
flexibility on the buffer zone will be considered. When flexibility in the buffer
zone width is determined to be necessary by the City, the project proposer or
applicant must consider the following:
• The buffer zone width averaging will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
• The buffer zone plan will take into account landscape connections and
habitat corridors needs to be incorporated into the buffer plan. See
definition of buffer zone averaging in Section III.
• The buffer zone plan will include the percent of the buffer zone that will
be impacted as compared to the size of the wetland.
• A minimum 30’ buffer zone is encouraged on P and M1 wetlands.
• A minimum 15’ buffer zone is encouraged on M2.
• Averaged buffer zone acreage must be equal to or greater than the required
buffer zone acreage.
• Buffer zone averaging will be based on each wetland to the greatest extent
possible. The City at its discretion may allow buffer zone averaging within
the entire development project.
An exception to the minimum buffer zone average will be considered for linear public
road projects.
Page 17
March 2021
Conservation easements are required over the buffer zone perimeter and will be recorded
at the time of final plat. The City Engineer will review the proposal and either approve,
approve with conditions, or deny the request to utilize buffer zone averaging around the
wetland.
2. Buffer Establishment
For projects that require buffer zone establishment, a buffer zone Establishment and
Management Plan must be submitted for review and approval by the City. This can
include the current BWSR or Mn/DOT guidelines regarding planting of native species on
wetland replacement sites. Revegetation with native plants is required in wetland buffer
zones. If the wetland buffer is not disturbed as a result of development construction, or
other activity, the existing natural vegetation shall be considered acceptable. This
exception does not apply to wetland buffer zones that receive replacement credit as part
of an approved replacement plan.
Buffer zone monitoring will be required to be completed by the project proposer for a
minimum of five years unless the City determines that the buffer zones is meeting
performance standards. The City can extend this monitoring requirement if the buffer
zone is not meeting performance standards. An annual monitoring report shall be
submitted to the City and include a summary of buffer zone management activities, a
quantification of the plant species present, a picture of the buffer zone, and discussion of
upcoming buffer zone management activities. The buffer zone will need to meet the
City’s performance standards. Information about what needs to be included in this buffer
zone Establishment and Management Plan and the performance standards are included in
Section X.B.
3. Buffer Zones Around Replacement Wetlands
Buffer zones will be required to be established around wetland replacement sites. If the
wetland replacement is proposed to be an expansion of an existing wetland, the buffer
zone width required for the existing wetland category will be the required buffer zone
width of the replacement area, or as required in MnRule 8420.0522, Subp. 6, whichever
is greater. If the wetland replacement is a stand-alone site, the buffer width will be based
on the required buffer zone width of the wetland being impacted, or as required in
MnRule 8420.0522, Subp. 6, whichever is greater.
4. Storm Water Pre-Treatment
Storm water can have a detrimental impact on wetlands. To alleviate the sediment and
nutrient loading such input places on wetlands, this Plan includes various levels of storm
water pretreatment as follows:
Preserve: Sediment and nutrient pretreatment required, consider diversion if possible
Manage 1: Sediment and nutrient pretreatment required.
Manage 2: Sediment pretreatment required.
Manage 3: Pretreatment to NPDES standards (per Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency rules) is required if these standards apply to the project.
Page 18
March 2021
The above requirements are left somewhat open as to the particular method selected for
each case. This will allow some flexibility, especially to incorporate new technologies
and techniques. Storm water ponds will be required to be placed in easements. Final
approval of treatment methods shall in all cases be left to the City Engineer.
5. Storm Water Treatment Ponds Within Wetland Buffer Zones
Storm water treatment ponds within designated wetland buffer zones are becoming a
common land development practice. Although the pond compromises the wetland buffer
zone, the construction of a pond provides storm water treatment where suspended solids
and other pollutants settle out prior to overflowing into a wetland. A well designed and
placed treatment pond can be beneficial to the quality and integrity of the adjacent
wetland. The basin also provides additional flood control for large rain events.
The design and placement of storm water treatment ponds within wetland buffer zones
must comply with the provisions of the Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan
(CSWMP) and this document concerning storm water treatment. The design guidelines
are available from the City.
If the area of a wetland buffer zone includes a storm water treatment pond, the wetland
buffer zone must adhere to the following:
• Wetland buffer zone must be provided between the pond and the wetland and
around the perimeter of the entire system. Wetland buffer zone must be a
minimum 15 feet between the NWL of the pond and wetland edge.
• Only one treatment pond in the wetland buffer zone is allowed.
• Buffer zone must be equal to the total buffer zone required for the wetland based
on the classification prescribed in Table IX-1. The storm water pond, as
measured from the Normal Water Level (NWL), will not count towards the buffer
zone.
Infiltration basins (and similar stormwater best management practices) can be placed
within the wetland buffer at the discretion and upon approval of the City Engineer. The
surface area of the infiltration basin can be included, at the discretion and upon approval
by the City Engineer, as part of the required buffer zone since its function and structure is
similar to that of the buffer zone. In these cases, the infiltration basin should have at least
75% cover of vegetation.
Wetlands created as part of water quality treatment systems, are eligible for replacement
credit as per MnRule 8420.0526, Subp 7.C, as amended.
6. Wetland Buffer Zone Monuments
For all wetland buffer easements, the developer shall be responsible for the installation of
monuments which mark the outer edge of the wetland buffer zones. Buffer zone
monuments must be indicated on the grading plan and shall generally be placed at the
intersections of lot lines and the buffer zone boundary. All markers and their placement
shall be per City specification or approved by the City Engineer. A monument template is
available at the City.
Page 19
March 2021
VIII-I. Wetland Management and Protection Requirements
Management
Class
Management
Strategy
Wetland Buffer Zone
Standards
Storm Water Management Minimum Mitigation
Standard
Preserve Maintain wetland and existing
functions, values, and wildlife
habitat.
Apply strict avoidance standards.
75 feet
30’ minimum if buffer zone
averaging is encouraged.
Monuments required.
Sediment and nutrient
pretreatment required; consider
diversion if possible.
3:1 replacement ratio with a
minimum 2 acres of Wetland
Replacement Credit and maximum
1 acre of Upland Buffer Credit for
every acre impacted.
Manage 1 Maintain wetland without
degrading existing functions,
values and wildlife habitat.
Sequencing is required.
50 feet
30’ minimum if buffer zone
averaging is encouraged.
Monuments required.
Sediment and nutrient
pretreatment required.
2:1 replacement ratio with a
minimum of 1 acre of Wetland
Replacement Credit and a
maximum of 1 acre of Upland
Buffer Credit for every acre
impacted. Additional mitigation
may be required by the WCA in
MR 8420.
Manage 2 Maintain wetland functionality.
Allow limited sequencing
flexibility.
30 feet
15’ minimum if buffer zone
averaging is encouraged.
Monuments required.
Sediment pretreatment
required.
2:1 replacement ratio with a
minimum of 1 acre of Wetland
Replacement Credit and maximum
of 1 acre of Upland Buffer Credit
for every acre impacted.
Additional mitigation may be
required by the WCA in MR 8420.
Manage 3
Allow maximum sequencing
flexibility.
15 feet for non-agricultural
areas only.
Monuments not required.
Pretreatment to NPDES
standards (per Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency
rules) is required if these
standards apply to the project.
2:1 replacement ratio with a
minimum of 1 acre of Wetland
Replacement Credit and maximum
of 1 acre of Upland Buffer Credit
for every acre impacted.
Additional mitigation may be
required by the WCA in MR 8420.
Page 20
March 2021
IX. Wetland Replacement
Subject to an approved sequencing evaluation, the applicant shall provide a wetland replacement
plan to account for the proposed wetland impacts. Impacts due to development or other
construction activity are regulated under the WCA. In terms of impact mitigation, the WCA
serves as a baseline for evaluation of impacts and associated wetland replacement plans. This
Plan specifies guidelines for City Staff and Commission/Council review and recommendations
for individual wetlands to ensure resource allocation is optimized. The guidelines are as follows:
Preserve: Wetlands under this category shall receive the maximum amount of protection
under this Plan. Impacts will be allowed only under extreme hardship. Replacement is
required at a 3:1 ratio. For project specific replacement a minimum of 2 acres of Wetland
Replacement Credit and a maximum of 1 acre of Upland Buffer Credit shall replace
every acre impacted.
Manage 1: Mitigation of wetlands in this category will be at a minimum 2:1 ratio. For
project specific replacement, a minimum of 1 acre of Wetland Replacement Credit and a
maximum of 1 acre of Upland Buffer Credit shall replace every acre impacted.
Additional mitigation may be required MnRule 8420.
Manage 2: Mitigation of wetlands in this category will be at a minimum 2:1 ratio. For
project specific replacement, a minimum of 1 acre of Wetland Replacement Credit and a
maximum of 1 acre of Upland Buffer Credit shall replace every acre impacted.
Additional mitigation may be required by MnRule 8420.
Manage 3: Mitigation of wetlands in this category will be at a minimum 2:1 ratio. For
project specific replacement, a minimum of 1 acre of Wetland Replacement Credit and a
maximum of 1 acre of Upland Buffer Credit shall replace every acre impacted. WCA
sequencing flexibility is applicable for these wetlands. Additional mitigation may be
required by MnRule 8420.
The City has a goal of no net loss of wetland within its political boundary. The wetland
replacement application must contain a narrative that evaluates the wetland replacement siting
prioritization through the siting sequence to the point of the chosen wetland replacement plan.
The wetland replacement siting priority is as follows:
1. Wetland replacement through onsite mitigation within the project site if a historically
drained, restorable wetland is present on site or there is opportunity for a reasonable
expansion of an existing wetland that will be more beneficial to the City’s goal of no
net loss of wetland than the purchase of wetland banking credits, per discretion of the
City staff.
Page 21
March 2021
2. Wetland replacement through onsite mitigation within the City limits if a historically
drained, restorable wetland is present on site or there is opportunity for a reasonable
expansion of an existing wetland that will be more beneficial to the City’s goal of no
net loss of wetland than the purchase of wetland banking credits, per discretion of the
City staff.
3. Purchase of wetland banking credits from a state-approved wetland bank, per
MnRule 8420.0522 siting of replacement requirements, as amended.
If onsite wetland mitigation is proposed, the preservation of existing wetlands on the subject
property is not an eligible credit for the mitigation requirements except as otherwise provided in
MnRule 8420.0526. Onsite mitigation through the restoration of a drained wetland is preferred.
Wetland creation adjacent to Manage 2 or Manage 3 wetlands is also acceptable. Expansion
adjacent to Preserve and Manage 1 wetlands is not an action eligible for credit. For example, the
restoration or expansion of a Manage 2 or 3 wetland would be preferable rather than the
expansion of a Preserve or Manage 1 wetland. The goal of this recommendation is to increase the
functions and values of the degraded wetlands within the City as part of projects that result in
impacting wetlands. As of the date of this amendment, there are no wetland bank sites within the
City of Rosemount. A goal of the City is to identify, evaluate, and pursue wetland bank sites
within the City. As wetlands are assessed using the newly incorporated MnRAM, potential
wetland restoration opportunities will be identified that could be utilized as wetland bank sites.
In the event that project-specific wetland replacement fails, the applicant shall be responsible for
proposing and developing an alternative plan that fulfills the requirements of the approved
wetland replacement plan. The City may provide additional input or require alternative
replacement strategies that ensure the requirements of the replacement plan (WCA) are met and
that the alternative plans meet the intent of the WMP. These alternatives will be developed on a
case-by-case basis and at the discretion of the City.
Replacement Wetlands and Buffer Zones
A. Monitoring
All on site replacement wetlands must be certified by the City of Rosemount, as per
MnRule 8420.0800, prior to the start of the wetland monitoring period. Wetland
monitoring is required by the applicant for replacement wetlands for a period of five
years, or as required as per MnRule 8420, as amended. The developer coordinates the
monitoring and maintenance for wetland replacement sites. Monitoring includes actively
managing the replacement site to ensure that vegetation is becoming established, erosion
problem areas are stabilized, hydrology criteria are being met, and any other activities to
ensure the wetland replacement goals are met. The monitoring requirements as per
MnRule 8420.0810, as amended, are included by reference in this Plan. Annual
monitoring reports should be submitted to the City for review.
Page 22
March 2021
B. Performance Standards
Wetland performance standards for replacement wetlands will be evaluated on a per-
project basis by the City based on the performance standards outlined in MnRule
8420.0528. On site replacement plan applications must contain a wetland vegetation
Establishment and Management Plan for all wetland replacement sites. The
Establishment and Management Plan must include performance standards for vegetation
establishment that ensure the dominance of native wetland species appropriate for the
landscape conditions of the replacement site. The City, at its discretion, may require
performance standards that differ from the applicant’s plan if the City determines the
applicant’s plan does not meet the intent of the WMP, the WCA, or may not adequately
replace the lost functions and values of the wetland that is proposed to be impacted.
Establishment and Management Plans need to include:
1. A seeding plan with a native seed mix appropriate for site conditions for buffer
zones that are to be created or reestablished.
2. Five-year maintenance plan.
3. Maintenance strategies and schedule designed to meet performance standards.
These strategies could include, but are not limited to:
a. Annual mowing
b. Spot spraying herbicide
c. Reseeding or over-seeding
d. Planting plugs
e. Burning
The buffer will need to meet the City’s performance standards, but buffer zone
performance standards will also be evaluated on a per project basis by the City if the
developer proposes differing criteria. Buffer zones and replacement wetlands must meet
the following performance standards by the end of the monitoring period:
1. 90% coverage with vegetation.
2. To encourage native vegetation, coverage needs to contain a minimum of 80%
native plant species.
3. To encourage plant species diversity, a minimum of 50% of the seed mix plant
species, or a minimum of ten species (whichever is less), must be present.
4. Vegetation must be comprised of grasses and forbs but may also include trees and
shrubs.
5. Vegetation must contain less than 20% of “State Prohibited Noxious Weeds,” as
listed by the Minnesota Department of Agriculture.
If at any time during the establishment period of the buffer zone or replacement wetland
the City determines that it is not meeting the agreed upon performance standards, the City
can require corrective action to ensure compliance. If compliance is not met by the
project proposer, the City will draw on the developer’s financial security to complete the
work.
Page 23
March 2021
C. Construction Certification
In accordance with MnRule 8420.0522, Subp. 9, a financial assurance, in an amount and
from a source acceptable to the City of Rosemount, is required with the Subdivision or
Development Agreement to ensure the proper establishment of the mitigation site(s) or
buffer zones. One fifth of the financial assurance shall be returned to the developer after
City approval of each yearly monitoring report showing satisfactory vegetation
establishment. The final retained amount of the assurance will be returned upon issuance
of the Certificate of Compliance indicating successful replacement of wetland functions
and values and fulfillment of any and all conditions of the approved wetland replacement
plan. The applicant must request the final review of the replacement and demonstrate that
the replacement site(s) are eligible for receipt of the Certification of Compliance.
Page 24
March 2021
X. New Wetlands
“New wetlands” include wetlands deliberately created in upland (based on recent wetland
delineation). This might include wetlands created as part of a wetland mitigation/creation project
or as a result of blocked drainage patterns.
Because newly created wetlands take time to develop into functioning wetlands, the functional
assessment, if done immediately, would not provide a reasonable indicator of the quality of the
wetland as intended. Rather, a functional based categorization should be undertaken when the
wetland has reached the fully developed functionality intended. Normally it could take 5-10
years for a created wetland to become established. A full functional assessment will be done 5
years after its creation and scores stored in the inventory GIS attribute data. Upon review of the
new wetland’s progress and score, the City Engineer will place it in the category appropriate to
the score. The City Engineer may place a created wetland in any category that is appropriate
before the functionality has reached the level required by this Plan.
Wet areas created by human activity (“incidental wetlands”) as specified in MnRules 8420.0105
not intended to produce wetland shall not become part of this Plan.
Appendix
March 2021
APPENDIX A – ASSESSMENT RESULTS
""L
""L
""L""L
""L
""L
""L
""L
62
436
109
15
551
260
618
340
298
533
682
645
14
263
395
568
705
143
83
159
102
558
26
445
433
709
605
13
708
333
351
407
664
487
24
53
44
169
657
638
48
461
219
507
611
22
284524
496
646
679
38
359
152
539
629
157
139
614
255 253
69
672
417
384
332
582
556
168
537
541
212
98
355
226
124
40 31
183
557
268
194
581
642
325
698
176
20
177
294 288
238
610
509
399
273
142
660
259
278
616
621
676
419
633
462
252
95
560
187
464
588
56
368
493
580
586
36
671
335
608
552
207
61 132
331
604
319
200
214214
309
643
563
348
538
5
324
448
204
34
696
110
415
381381
239
23
619
248
282282
225
246
275
21
112
30
550
302
424
555
345
75
408
647
636
118
653
367
627
598
152
165
71
71
338
3535
650
136
577
471
347
434
369
665
380
188
379
28
307
640
623
303
463
220230
156
669
18
251
526
337
438
620
670
413
631
277 548
190
70
649
150
74
637
656
341
299299
330
382
52
27
85
80
536
65
16
469
674
361
704
120
146
211
191
217
232
453
641
442 699
320
46
528
224
681
639
504
12
296
576
452
593
129
529
81
468
644
595
474
470
313
254
581
634
615625
584
683
57
702
121128
609
356
293
96
628
437
707
546546
380
314
209 203
425
266
684
701
685
199
182
490
54
454
389
697
283
127
154
149
585
523 258
427
594
216
17
404
247
289
265
100
349
540
678
613
658
508
489
316
390
635
411
498
680
655
626
400
597
583 63
173
535
140
579
630
306
606 148
310
525
431
286
596
700
380
202
180
675
29
193
287
167
450
227
97
233
668
666
386
119
617
495
428
632
322
443
667
567
196
607
87 88
432
37
235
587
300
706
695
86
43
564
339
559
32
600
603
138
569
703
362
234
612
534
578
663663663
305
602
49 51
51
491
192
360360
503
570
285
33
279
206
206
290295
79 662
""L
""L
""L""L
""L
""L
""L
""L
62
436
109
15
551
260
618
340
298
533
682
645
14
263
395
568
705
143
83
159
102
558
26
445
433
709
605
13
708
333
351
407
664
487
24
53
44
169
657
638
48
461
219
507
611
22
284524
496
646
679
38
359
152
539
629
157
139
614
255 253
69
672
417
384
332
582
556
168
537
541
212
98
355
226
124
40 31
183
557
268
194
581
642
325
698
176
20
177
294 288
238
610
509
399
273
142
660
259
278
616
621
676
419
633
462
252
95
560
187
464
588
56
368
493
580
586
36
671
335
608
552
207
61 132
331
604
319
200
214214
309
643
563
348
538
5
324
448
204
34
696
110
415
381381
239
23
619
248
282282
225
246
275
21
112
30
550
302
424
555
345
75
408
647
636
118
653
367
627
598
152
165
71
71
338
3535
650
136
577
471
347
434
369
665
380
188
379
28
307
640
623
303
463
220230
156
669
18
251
526
337
438
620
670
413
631
277 548
190
70
649
150
74
637
656
341
299299
330
382
52
27
85
80
536
65
16
469
674
361
704
120
146
211
191
217
232
453
641
442 699
320
46
528
224
681
639
504
12
296
576
452
593
129
529
81
468
644
595
474
470
313
254
581
634
615625
584
683
57
702
121128
609
356
293
96
628
437
707
546546
380
314
209 203
425
266
684
701
685
199
182
490
54
454
389
697
283
127
154
149
585
523 258
427
594
216
17
404
247
289
265
100
349
540
678
613
658
508
489
316
390
635
411
498
680
655
626
400
597
583 63
173
535
140
579
630
306
606 148
310
525
431
286
596
700
380
202
180
675
29
193
287
167
450
227
97
233
668
666
386
119
617
495
428
632
322
443
667
567
196
607
87 88
432
37
235
587
300
706
695
86
43
564
339
559
32
600
603
138
569
703
362
234
612
534
578
663663663
305
602
49 51
51
491
192
360360
503
570
285
33
279
206
206
290295
79 662
Path: T:\Project\CommDev\WetlandManagementPlan\CWMP.mxdWetland Inventory Map
""L Lift Station
Storm Sewer >= 24"
Storm Force Main
Minor Watershed Boundary
Mitigation Location
Wetland Classification
Preserve
Manage1
Manage2
Manage3
Undetermined
Utilize
8/19/2020
0 0.5 10.25 Mile
Appendix
March 2021
APPENDIX B – CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
11-7-3: WETLAND OVERLAY REGULATIONS: A. Purpose And Intent: It is the intent of these wetland overlay regulations to impose restrictions in addition to the those required by the underlying zoning for the protection of wetlands as defined by the United States Army Corps of Engineers’
Wetland Delineation Manual 1987 or Minnesota Rule 8420 with the following implementation purposes: 1. To implement the Rosemount Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan. 2. To achieve no net loss in the quantity, quality, and biological diversity of existing wetlands. 3. To increase the quantity, quality, and biological diversity of wetlands by restoring or enhancing diminished or drained wetlands. 4. To avoid direct or indirect impacts from activities that destroy or diminish the quantity, quality, and biological diversity of wetlands. 5. To replace wetland values where avoidance of activity is not feasible and prudent. B. Application Required: Any property proposing an activity that is regulated as described within Section IV. Wetland Regulations of the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan shall submit an application to the City through the Joint
Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota available through the Board of Soil and Water Resources. This application shall be subject to the requirements of this Section, the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan, and Minnesota Rule 8420. C. Wetland Classification: Wetlands are classified for management and protection based on the “Basic Wetland Protection” management strategy in MnRAM. The management classifications and corresponding functional scores are as follows: 1. Preserve (P): Wetlands that were placed into the Preserve category generally provided the highest functions for vegetative diversity and wildlife habitat. 2. Manage 1 (M1): Wetlands that were placed into the Manage 1 category generally provided high functions for vegetative diversity and wildlife habitat with some functions for water quality protection and flood attenuation. 3. Manage 2 (M2): Wetlands that were placed into the Manage 2 category generally provided some functions for vegetative diversity and wildlife habitat with high functions for water quality protection and flood attenuation. 4. Manage 3 (M3): Wetlands that were placed into the Manage 3 category generally provided the functions for water quality protection and flood attenuation. D. Wetland Applications: Wetland related applications shall be submitted to the City of Rosemount as per the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan and MnRule 8420. 1. Wetland Boundary or Type Application: When an application subject to Chapter 10 of this Title or Title 12 Subdivision is submitted to the City, the applicant shall submit a wetland delineation to determine the wetland boundary and type. The delineation will include the following information:
a. Level 1 delineation completed in compliance with the most recent US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Guidance for Offsite
Hydrology/Wetland Determinations. b. If a Level 1 delineation indicts the likelihood of a wetland, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Level 2 delineation in compliance with the most recent USACE Manual for Delineating
Wetlands in Conjunction with the Midwest Supplement. c. Delineations shall be subject to field verification by City staff, the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), and/or USACE. 2. No Loss and Exemption Applications: The Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) No Loss and Exemption standards are covered in MnRule 8420.0410-.0420, as amended. Applications for No Loss or Exemption determinations shall follow the procedures and requirements of MnRule 8420. Wet areas created by human activity (“incidental wetlands”) as specified in MnRules 8420.0105 not intended to produce wetland shall not be regulated by this Ordinance. Wetlands that are exempt per the WCA shall not be regulated by the policies within this Ordinance. However, buffer zones and restoration of disturbed areas in conformance with this Ordinance may be required if the project is part of an overall land development plan. 3. Sequencing Application: An applicant proposing to impact wetlands must submit an application that demonstrates adherence to the Sequencing Standards outlined in MnRule 8420.0520. The applicant may submit a sequencing evaluation with the wetland replacement plan application or apply for a preliminary sequencing decision from the City, as per MnRule 8420.0325, as amended. 4. Replacement Plan Application: a. Concurrently with a sequencing application requesting a determination that wetland impacts are unavoidable, a replacement plan application shall be submitted for the activities requiring compensatory mitigation, including: i. Filling or draining of any wetland; ii. Excavating in the permanently or semi-permanently flooded areas of a type 3, 4, or 5 wetland; iii. Excavation that results in conversion to non-wetland. b. Wetland impacts that occur due to road improvement projects that address safety issues and are not undertaken solely to accommodate additional traffic capacity by the City or County as the local road authority may be eligible to be replaced by BWSR through the Local Government Wetland Replacement Program (LGRWRP).
c. The lost functions and values of the wetland impacted must be replaced in conformance with the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan Section X: Wetland Replacement. E. Local Government Unit Decision Authority: Wetland applications decisions shall be determined as follows: 1. City staff has the administrative authority to approve wetland boundary, wetland type, no loss, and exemption applications. 2. City staff has the administrative authority to approve sequencing and replacement plans that impact less than 10,000 square feet of wetlands. 3. City staff may request the City Council review and approve any applications listed in Subsections 11-7-3 E.1. and E.2. 4. The City Council shall approve all sequencing and replacement plans that impact 10,000 square feet or greater of wetlands. F. Appeals of Wetland Application Decisions: Appeals of decisions of applications submitted under Section 11-7-3 D. made by the City will follow the appeal process in accordance with MnRule 8420, as amended. G. Wetland Buffers 1. Buffer Establishment: a. Application: Any property in which an application has been required under Subsection 11-7-3 B. and has been determined to have a wetland that has been classified under Subsection 11-7-3 C. shall submit a Buffer Zone Establishment and Management Plan for review and approval by the City Engineer. The Plan shall be reviewed and approved subject to the standards described in the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan Subsections VIII.B.2. and X.B. b. Continued Maintenance: The maintenance and vegetation performance of the Buffer shall be subject to the standards of Section X. of the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan: Wetland Monitoring. Once established, activities in buffer zones that are not associated with the approved Plan that disturb the roots or influence the growth of the vegetation, such as grading, mowing, landscaping and planting, fertilizing, spraying (herbicides), and seeding or sodding are prohibited. Herbicides and controlled burns or other management practices used to control noxious weeds or invasive species will be allowed only with permission from the City Engineer. Enhancement of the buffer zone through installation of additional native plantings is allowed and encouraged. 2. Buffer Zone Widths by Wetland Classification: a. Preserve: 75 Feet. b. Manage 1: 50 Feet. c. Manage 2: 30 Feet.
d. Manage 3: i. Non-Agricultural Area: 15 Feet ii. Agricultural Area: None. 3. Buffer Averaging: Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan Subsection VIII.B.1. describes functions of buffer zones. A property owner may request an adjustment to the Buffer Zone Widths regulation in Subsection 11-7-3 D.2. through Buffer Averaging to determine an alternate Buffer Width approved by the City Engineer subject to the following standards: a. The Buffer Averaging improves the buffer zone function. b. The Buffer Zone Prioritization Review described with the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan subsection VII.B.1. 4. Structural Setback from Buffer Zone: 30 Feet. 5. Conservation Easements: Buffer zones will be contained within a conservation easement that includes both the wetland and the buffer zone. 6. Buffer Zone Monuments: The installation of monuments which mark the outer edge of the wetland buffer zones. All markers and their placement shall be per city specification or approved by the City Engineer. H. Storm Water Pre-Treatment: To alleviate the sediment and nutrient loading of wetlands, storm water pretreatment shall be required based on wetland classification as follows: 1. Preserve: Sediment and nutrient pretreatment required, consider diversion if possible. 2. Manage 1: Sediment and nutrient pretreatment required. 3. Manage 2: Sediment pretreatment required. 4. Manage 3: Pretreatment to NPDES standards (per Minnesota Pollution Control Agency rules) is required if these standards apply to the project. I. Enforcement: WCA enforcement shall be in conformance with MnRule 8240. J. Lots in Existence Before July 21, 1998: The City first adopted the Comprehensive Wetland Management Plan on July 21, 1998. A lot which is part of a subdivision or plat, an auditor's subdivision or a registered land survey; or a parcel of land not so platted, for which a deed has been recorded in the Dakota County recorder's office prior to July 21, 1998 shall not be required to meet the standards of Subsections 11-7-3 C., D., E., and G. For the lots that existed before the July 21, 1998, the following standards shall be required: 1. Buffer Zone: 15 Feet. 2. Structural Setback from Buffer Zone: 15 Feet. 3. Buffer Maintenance: Activities that disturb the roots or influence the growth of the vegetation, such as grading, mowing, landscaping and planting, fertilizing, spraying (herbicides), and seeding or sodding are prohibited. Herbicides and controlled burns or other management practices used to control noxious weeds or invasive species will be allowed only with permission from the City Engineer. Enhancement of the buffer zone through installation of additional native plantings is allowed and encouraged.