The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSummary of Comments on Dogtown Bank Parcel As Built ReportSummary of Comments on 20181097 Ver 2_RES_20181097v2_Dogtown Bank Parcel As Built Report_8.2023_20230825 Page: 4 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Highlight Date: 12/1/2023 2:17:49 PM Page: 5 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Highlight Date: 12/1/2023 2:19:54 PM Expand on this. Would this be changing Buffer credits? Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 2:32:57 PM Add vigor data in upcoming monitoring reports as well. Page: 6 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 2:36:46 PM Success criteria for Buffer is 260 stems per acre. Page: 9 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 12:45:06 PM The Sqft amount in BPDP is 63,848sqft for pond foot print. Why did the footprint get larger? Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 12:43:53 PM S2 151-200 is not approved according to the approved BPDP. According to BPDP this is supposed to be preservation. Adjust map, survey, and credit table accordingly. Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 12:42:55 PM Unable to read all of these feature names. Format appropriately so this is legible. Page: 11 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:51:27 PM Provide a buffer width map depicting 0-50, 51-151, and 150-200. We are having a hard time validating appropriate widths and their associated credits. Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 11:38:30 AM As per the approved BPDP, this needs to stay as preservation. Adjust the credit table accordingly Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:48:46 PM Why is this area off of S1 not preservation anymore? Survey and approved BPDP is showing it as 50ft preservation, please update accordingly Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 11:46:08 AM There should be a gap in this location as per the BPDP and As Built Survey Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 11:23:40 AM Shouldnt this be 151-200? Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:14:44 PM These zones do not seem to be measured correctly. Since green is supposed to be 0-50 and yellow hatched is 101-151...where is the 51-100 representation? Why is this area not contributing to the non-standard buffer width for stream credit like everywhere else? Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:05:24 PM Should the preservation be 151-200? Since the non-standard buffer width is 51-150. If so show as 151-200ft. Page: 12 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:59:19 PM Credit table has the pond footprints labeled as PA, PB, and PC but it is not on the map. Label these pond foot prints accordingly on the map. Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 11:55:25 AM There needs to be a credit gap here as per the BPDP and As Built Survey Page: 13 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 12:35:25 PM Figure 2B shows the correct pond footprint representation as per the approved BPDP which was pre-construction footprint, this should not change from the BPDP. Adjust this survey to correctly to represent the pond footprint and adjust the credit table accordingly. This survey is showing more restoration area and less preservation area than what the BPDP represented as existing pond foot print. DWR is assuming this is why 17,259sqf was added to the pond foot print as compared to the BPDP. Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 12:35:55 PM What is this gap here? The BPDP does not show this and there are no call outs and this seems pretty wide for it to be top of bank on stream. Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:06:47 PM This survey does not represent the buffer zones as DWR needs them represented. Identify the ranges of the credit zones as identified in the project credit table (0-50, 51-150, 151-200 etc.) Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:08:16 PM There is no symbology representing these zone ranges, so therefore DWR cannot confirm the total area is compliant with the BPDP or As Built as applicable. Page: 14 Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 12:03:40 PM Where is the original signature? DWR needs to be able to see the signature on the survey Author: bhartshorn Subject: Sticky Note Date: 12/1/2023 1:29:04 PM Change this portion off of S2 to preservation as per the approved BPDP