Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20010102 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20091006Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Date of Office Review: /0 /6 o Evaluator's Name(s): UL2 Date of Report: ? 21M Report for Monitoring Ye r: S Date of Field Review: % Evaluator's Name(s): Other Individuals/Agencies Pr sen : Weather Conditions (today & recent): Directions to Site: Located between Asheboro and Coleridge near intersection of Tommy Cox Rd. and NC 42 1. Office Review Information: Project Number: EEP71J Project History Project Name: Caviness Mitigation Site County(ies): Randolph Event Basin & subbasin: Cape Fear 03030003 Report Receipt: Monitoring Nearest Stream: Tibbs Run Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: C j Mitigator Type: EEP/WRP DOT Status: DOT Event Date 4/14/2008 Total Mitigation on Site Wetland: Stream: 3065 linear feet Buffer: Nutr. Offset: Approved mitigation plan available? Yes No i Monitoring reports available? Yes No Problem areas identified in reports? Yes No Problem areas addressed on site? Yes No Mitigation required on site: *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: Monitoring Success Success Mitigation Component Year (report) (field) Resolved EEP73-1 3065 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration 1 -qv N4, Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2 Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality 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 Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Component: 3065 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration 1 Component ID: EEP73-1 Description: Restoration of Tibbs Run and West Branch Location within project: See maps III. Success Criteria Evaluation: STREAMBANK STABILITY - Approved Success Criteria: none listed - no geomorphic data collection required Are streambanks stable? Yes No /Ix. ID -CVs? If no, provide description and notes regarding stability issues: STRUCTURES - Approved Success Criteria: none listed List all types of structures present on site: ftvS,S V*G Are the structures installed correctly? Yes No Are the structures made of acceptable material? Yes No (Unacceptable materials include: railroad ties, concrete with rebar, etc. Are the structures located approximately where shown on the plan? Yes No Are the structures stable (e.g. erosion, deposition, etc.)? Yes No Provide description and notes regarding problematic structures: FEATURES - Approved Success Criteria: none listed Are riffles and pools in approximately the correct locations Yes No Is the final sinuosity and gradient designed approximately to plan specifications? Yes No Any evidence of vegetation growing on the stream bed or in the thalweg Yes No Percentage of the restoration reach that has: Flowing water Ponded areas Describe any stream features that provide evidence of unstable stream reaches (e.g. mid-channel bars, downstream meander migration, chute cutoff formation, etc.): AQUATIC BIOTA - Approved Success Criteria: no success criterias listed but MI sampling done in 2006 has MI assemblages tolerant of pollution with very f Is aquatic life present in the channel? ' Yes No Description of taxa observed, incl. quantities of individuals and general distribution of biota. Include a brief description of the sampling methodology. List any remaining aquatic biota issues to address (e.g. erosion, discharges or toxicants, etc.): Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2 Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species success-320stms/ac after 3yrs, 260stms/ac after 5yrs Species Story TPAP/ cover I Monitoring report indicates success? Yes _ND Average TPA for entire site (per report): Observational field data agrees? Yes No based on community composition? Yes No based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No Vegetation planted on site? Yes No Date of last planting: Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No rGeneral observations on condition of riparian/buffer areas (e.g. buffer width, overall health of vegetation, etc.): ICE 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): r List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.) MITIGATION SUCCESS: Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful List specific reasons for lack of success for this component: Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.): Use the definitions in the joint state/federal stream mitigation guidelines to determine the correct type of mitigation used for this component. During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report. Attach maps showing photo locations, problem areas, and/or important stream features. Additional notes related to evaluation of this component; Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2 . Buffer Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Component: #Error Description: Location within project: III. Buffer Site Details: Riparian Buffer (Streams Only) Streams verified by DWQ Comments: Component ID: Nutrient Offset (Streams or Ditches) Yes No Buffer Width: Comments: Total Acres: Total Acres: Restored Acres: Restored Acres: Enhanced Acres: Enhanced Acres: Buffer Width: 50' > 50' j Grandfathered Site? (EEP Only) Yes No IV. Success Criteria Evaluation: VEGETATION: Dominant Plant Species Species Story TPA/110 cover NOTE: Success Criteria is 320 spa Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Average TPA for entire site (per report): Observational field data agrees? Yes No Date of last planting: Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No General observations on condition of riparian/buffer areas and associated stream bank (e.g. bank stability, overall health of vegetation, etc.) _ 21 VIZ 07k b ( I I DL mr V JoM?)J is rro CFd1 Version 1.2 (March 5, 2009) rH6 5)f? ? CT 03) 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 is: successful partially successful not successful List specific reasons for lack of success for this component: 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