4.3 SR 03-20-2023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

b. Discuss the project's compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans listed in Item 9a above, concentrating on implications for environmental effects. There are no identified compatibility conflicts between the proposed project ancl nearby lancl uses or any local or regional plans. There are no zoning conflicts for the proposed land use of the site. c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential incompatibility as discussed in Item 9b above. There are no incompatibility measures to mitigate. 10. Geology, soils and topography/land forms: a. Geology - Describe the geology underlying the project area and identify and map any susceptible geologic features such as sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, unconfined/shallow aquifers, or karst conditions. Discuss any limitations of these features for the project and any effects the project could ha�e on these features. Identify any project designs or mitigation measures to address effects to geologic features. Minnesota Geological Survey data within the Project site lists the bedrock as Wonewoc Sandstone and Eau Claire Formatio� with depths to the bedrock ranging fi^om approximately 50 to 350 feet. There are no known or mapped sinkholes, shallow limestone, shallow aquifers, or karst features identified within or near the project area. b. Soils and topography - Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications and descriptions, including limitations of soils. Describe topography, any special site conditions relating to erosion potential, soil stability or other soils limitations, such as steep slopes, highly permeable soils. Provide estiuiated volume and acreage of soil excavation and/or grading. Discuss impacts from project activities (distinguish between construction and operational activities) related to soils and topography. Identify measures during and afterproject construction to address soil limitations including stabiliaation, soil corrections or other measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to stormwater runoff should be addressed in response to Item ll.b.ii. NRCS soil classifications with the Project Site and are illustrated on Appendi� A— Figure S, soils u�rit characteristics are provided in the followi�rg table. S mbol Soil Unit Name SI �oes HEL* Hydrologic Hydric Farmland y (° ) Group** Rating*** Classification 32B Nebish fine sandy 2_6 NHEL B Predominately All Areas are loam Non-H dric Prime Farmland Nebish fine sandy Predominately Farmland of 32C 6-12 PHEL B Statewide loam Non-Hydric Im ortance 32D Nebish fine sandy 12-18 HEL B P�'edominately Not Prime loam Non-H dric Farmland Page 6