20021572 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20090408

i
Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
O '
Date of Office Review: Evaluator
s Name(s):
Date of Report: Report for Monitoring Year:
Date of Field Review: ?00* 149 Evaluator's Name(s):
Other Individuals/Agencies Present.
Weather Conditions (today & recent):
Directions to Site: From Raleigh go west on US 64 to Siler City, then north on MILK Blvd (Snow Camp Rd). Continue north -12m
to community of Snow Camp and take right on SR 2358 for 1 m then right onto Quackenbush for 1.5m to road
1. Office Review Information:
-- ------ - - ---
Project Number: 20021572 ---
Proiect History
Project Name: Reedy Branch Event Event Date
County(ies): Alamance
Basin & subbasin: Cape Fear 03030002 Report Receipt: Monitoring 4/14/2008
Nearest Stream: Cane Creek
Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: NSW; C
Mitigator Type: EEP/WRP
11 DOT Status: non-DOT
Total Mitigation on Site
Wetland:
Stream: 3155 linear feet
Buffer:
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:
Add significant project-related events: reNorts ?I
i
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:
F_ Monitoring Success Success
Mitigation Component Year (report) (field) Resolved
20021572-1 3155 linear feet Stream Restoration 2
I
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 artially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this project:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
w
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Page 2 of 2
1
Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 3155 linear feet Stream Restoration 2 Component ID: 20021572-1
Description: moderately dense woodland surrounded by pasture
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
STREAMBANK STABILITY - Approved Success Criteria:
stable PDP
Are streambanks stable? Yes No
If no, provide description and notes regarding stability issues:
STRUCTURES - Approved Success Criteria:
+vanes, weirs, & existing bedrock to control grade at tops of riffles;root wads to protect outside meander ben
List all types of structures present on site: CiU') ? V, A
??, ?
Are the structures installed correctly? No
Are the structures made of acceptable material? Y4'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:
Are riffles and pools in approximately the correct locations ?,_"e.? No
Is the final sinuosity and gradient designed approximately to plan specifications? No
Any evidence of vegetation growing on the stream bed or in the thalwegNo / ???' `? S?
Percentage of the restoration reach that has: Flowing water 06). Ponded areas /` 1
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:
Is aquatic life present in the channel? Y 6s No
Description of taxa observed, incl. quantities of individuals and general distribution of biota. Include a brief
description of the samplin 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
survival of 320spa after 5yrs Species Story TPAi'/ cover
r
Monitoring report indicates success? Yep) No t ,)C
) -
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No AN V??
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting: <)+
t? J
Vegetation growing successfully. _ Yes No
-- - - - - - - - - 1
General observations on condition of riparian/buffer areas (e.g. buffer width, overall health of vegetation,
etc.):
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, ocati n(s and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to add )ss (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.):
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:
0 G, -Y
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2