20081644 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20090421

Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Date of Office Review:
Date of Report:
Date of Field Review: 00 Evaluator's Nam (s):
Other Individuals/Agencies Present:
LAE 21
Weather Conditions (today & recent):
Directions to Site: Project is SE of Goldsboro.
Part 1: Approx. 500' west of NC 111, south of the intersection of NC 111 and US 70
O...i 7 C...?{...:.J.. ..i 1 IC 7/1 ........... 4 ...:1.. CC -4 :..+.........L:.... ..i 1 IC 7n --A Alr` 4 4 A
1. Office Review Information:
Project Number: 20081644
Project Name: Walnut Creek Buffer Restoration Site
County(ies): Wayne
Basin & subbasin: Neuse 03020202
Nearest Stream: Walnut Creek
Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: C; NSW
Mitigator Type: Full-Delivery (EEP)
DOT Status:
Total Mitigation on Site
Wetland:
Stream:
Buffer: 25 acres
Nutr. Offset:
Approved mitigation plan available? Yes No
Monitoring reports available? Yes No
Problem areas identified in reports? Yes No
Problem areas addressed on site? Yes No
Project History
Event Event Date
Report Receipt: Monitoring 5/27/2008
Report Receipt: Monitoring 10/29/2008
Mitigation required on site: i "Add significant project-related events: reports,
Associated impacts (if known): received, construction, planting, repairs, etc.
During office review, note success criteria and evaluate each component based on monitoring report
results. Record relevant data in Sections II and III.
On back of sheet, note other information found during office review and/or to be obtained during site visit
II. Summary of Results:
Mitigation Component
Monitoring Success Success
Year (report) (field) Resolved
20081644-1 25 acres Buffer Restoration
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2
Evaluator's Name(s):
Report for Monitoring Year:
Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water uality
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this project is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this project:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2

Buffer Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 25 acres Buffer Restoration Component ID: 20081644-1
Description: 2 parts (See above)
Location within project: See above and maps
III. Buffer Site Details:
Riparian Buffer (Streams Only) Nutrient Offset (Streams or Ditches)
Streams verified by DWQ:
Comments:
Total Acres:
Restored Acres:
Enhanced Acres:
Buffer Width: 50' > 50'
Grandfathered Site? (EEP Only)
Yes No
IV. Success Criteria Evaluation:
VEGETATION:
NOTE: Success Criteria is 320 spa
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes o
Average TPA for entire site (per report
Observational field data agrees? Yes o
i
Date of last planting:
Dominant Plant Species
Species Sto TP / cover
r
Q?it ?? 11'1 (vz L
41
"W1
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
General observations on condition of riparian/buffer areas and
j overall health of vegetation, etc.)
Version 1.2 (March 5, 2009)
Yes No I Buffer Width:
Comments:
I
Total Acres:
Restored Acres:
Enhanced Acres:
stream bank (e.g. bank stability,
Page 1 of 2
Buffer Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
Easement Marking Method:
List any remaining issues to address (e.g. plant survival, easement encroachment, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the mitigation plan, this component i . successful partially successful not successful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this co
Additional Comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Label and attach photos to
this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, problem areas, and/or important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.2 (March 5, 2009) Page 2 of 2
nz
a
no
?a
= r
n
0
. `V
Ln 3
V
0 0
O
O O

SS°LU.000' N SJ Ll.VUV IV

rm
C
`J
(? vt

? 1 p rY

V "V
V
0
U1 ?
O
O
C
10 O /
0
a
o z
CD #
2

v4 --tl

0
0
0
3
N
7
rt
fD
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
a
c
rt
n
0
m
rt
O
3?-LU.000 Iv 35021.000' N
? (tARUL!;\!A - SHEET NUMBER 26 C rye.
- -
Dr --- - -
+ We // e . OB
Ly We To • ! Ke ?J Dr
/ NoA Ln To TO
70 We Go •j'" _ Dr Go Ke TO
NoA Ke•/ We POCOSjjv
to Dr To We i / We '
Po \ Ly p/
•`
oP Dr
We
,:r We JS
\ Ra y 1
Ke r' To
Dr To Ly
WaB \ • / Ra
a , WaB /. Ke Go
'ller
NoB ?
p 'r Chu h Ra La
LY Js -`
Go NoA Dr / We
. Ra Y
Ly WaC
• • 70 Js Ke
L Ke
1 ka o • l w pe r WaE%L NoA WaB
itt Go +Ra • + NOB Bb / Go
I Ly
Ra Qa' Elr y • W
Ly ? ?"o e LY
Bb Go Dr
Ra
\ G / Ly NoA/ Ra t NOA LY +
is
Go ) NoA Ra / We
NoA
Voq <q _? doe We
b Nob : ?. Js GO Casey
Bb G \
C
P
Ke NoA LY Ke J LY Ra \\ • r
Ra • Ra We
Ly NoB?
Ly NoB 4 Ly NoA LY Ra `-
n Ke NoA Js \ NOB G° /, • . Ly
1 1\ Ra
NoC y
9 /r Go t
NoC, Ly
C
GO`` GO a
i gb •Ke Go Ly NoA NoB +` + Keo Ra
NoB +
7 20 Ly
? ?.
j' We ?. Js Go
' Dr Ke • Bb OV
• NuA fob
Ke
L n
Ke NoC Ra
1 To f Ke.
J5
JS Dr We We
Ke / WaD ! WaB
Ke Ke Tr I r _
WaC NoA
Ke - - '0
We ?
To ?rr,A
r r?' N?g2 ?
La L a We Tr Ln Tr /... Js l Ra.' NoB
La ` We - tr WaC
E
We Tr
WaB ' CrC2
Po Ke ; is
1 ( Ln
WaB Go n
La
We Ln ?•'_ q Rm Ln Bb WaB
' Tr 6
La We? ;IKe °?'
/ T Ln Tr
/ La i WaD
La r
Rm Ke
La Ke
To La Tr
I d Dt Ui Tr
a La Ke
- -
J Ln Ke a ? Ke Le `. Ke Ali La
1J O
L_ La
- -
-- - - La Ln WaBWaDI? K