20050591 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20090603

• Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
N Division of Water Quality
Date of Office Review: Evaluator's Name(s):
Date of Report: Report for Monitoring Year:
Date of Field Review: 10-9 _ Evaluator's Name(s):
Other Individuals/Agencies Present:
Weather Conditions (today & recent):
Directions to Site: Located on E side of 177 between SR1120 & SR1122, approx, 3miles E of Hamptonville & 2 miles S of the
US421/1-77 interchange
1. Office Review Information:
Project Number: 20050591
Project Name: Rocky Branch Stream Restoration
County(ies): Yadkin
Basin & subbasin: Yadkin 03040102
Nearest Stream: Hunting Creek
Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: WS III
Mitigator Type: EEP/WRP
DOT Status: non-DOT
Total Mitigation on Site
Wetland:
Stream: POlinear feet
Buffer:
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
Mitigation required on site:
Associated impacts (if known):
Project History
aovsf or?

*Add significant project-related events: reports,
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.
11. Summary of Results:
Mitigation Component
Monitoring Success Success
Year (report) (field)
- - -,
Resolved
20050591-1 5000 linear feet Stream Restoration
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: 5000 linear feet Stream Restoration Component ID: 20050591-1
Description: presently pasture land for grazing beef cattle
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
STREAMBANK STABILITY - Approved Success Criteria:
stable PDP
Are streambanks stable? Yes No L t
If no, provide description and notes regarding stability issues: e
STRUCTURES - Approved Success Criteria:
single arm rock vane, j-hook vane, cross vane, root wads
List all types of structures present on site:
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:
- IT
FEATURES - Approved Success Criteria:
approx 50/50 pool/riffles
Are riffles and pools in approximately the correct locations
Is the final sinuosity and gradient designed approximately to plan specifications?
Any evidence of vegetation growing on the stream bed or in the thalweg
Percentage of the restoration reach that has: Flowing water Ponded areas
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
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:
none listed
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.
?N 1 } P AN er,
C?
? S
List any remaining aquatic biota issues to address)e.g. erosion, discharges or toxicants, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
?D%5 a? iIS? MsPage ,az
s'FitA?-AD?f h jP l

1

Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria:
survival of 260spa after 5yrs
/J&M)5 AQ7L
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPA/'* cover
4o
Observational field data agrees? Yes No A n r
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No 111( f
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
0A14
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? - Yes No 1 (5M6 6 N ,
General observations on condition of riparian buffer areas (e.g. buffer width, overall ealth of
etc.):
v U
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):
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
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
partially successful unsuccessful
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
I
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:
a f 7
01
57F4 ?9? 0 J
Oil
M ?'V

Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2