The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20031035 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20081120 ~Ctb5eOu-\- ~\AQb\-Eri@) Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Date of Office Review: \ \ \'21") \ G fl Evaluator's Name(s): . -n-~( l,\ Date of Report: ~~~ Report for Monitoring Year: 5 (neb) Date of Field Review: ~ . q Evaluator's Name(S):::I3:::tl1L- Other Individuals/Agencies Present: rnB'?\', U~,f':PA Icr~1 LD~ J' Weather Conditions (today & recent): ~ am / j:::wl - c-t.o (11\ ~ l LOl1A..rYu:> V\Aq~ Directions to Site: 12miWofTrenton, on Nsideof 4 ,uO"s'F), w ~ l)~~~\,-O~nd~ I. Office Review Information: Project Number: 20031035 Project Name: Neu-Con: Marston Site County(ies): Jones ! Basin & subbasin: Neuse 03020204 Nearest Stream: Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: Mitigator Type: Full-Delivery ( DOT Status: DOT Proiect History Event Construction Completed Credit Release Report Review - Streams Report Review - Wetlands Report Review - Wetlands Report Review - Streams C:..\_l.d,-'1 c,,-L \.... C (to"L \L",<L\C'-\ (\e-\(d V)"\ \.L\^CE~ reA c'\( ( k'~~ ('It \ Event Date 3/15/2004 9/25/2006 2/22/2007 3/7/2007 6/23/2008 8/5/2008 Total Mitiaation on Site Wetland: 46.4 acres Stream: 6416 linear feet Buffer: . ) \ \ \ l c'k1\ lr c,Q/J \ )\T)~ ('0 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: 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 I 20031035-1 5698 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration 1 5 20031035-2 718 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration 1 .20031035-3 37.7 acres Wetland Restoration 20031035-4 8,7 acres Wetland Enhancement 5 5 5 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: List specific reasons for lack of success for this project: successful partially successful unsuccessful .Y~V~O'''") ~cO'*~;~ /' ,..1, LM ctud @J r0C0m~{ C3L--v~,~rL-~~~~' Vl\ ~-\- ~'p\f,?) \LJLU CA)!J.., ,- WClb...A..- OO~ tV ll' b-t-'--O<-'0 bLU~~ A 2 .rv\5,j ~l.ovJ <.4-J'e.g L\- - G~J ~" ~~1 l.ouJ- '4-w ~od SU1\.-\~ ,-,~Lj" .so'J1J \9vl cJ~ r;:). ck:(.Mt'-.S. 4- cLX9.-~ u.pP<-LLV) ~Ch.JL.d an ~~O-UL (CLr\d N~~ ~ U'- Kble) -1>~~ ~j ~m.o..Q5l. (IV I ~u '-bvo.u&.n~? ~l~~) ol- LLrD Additional comments (e,g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc,): d.u"'- ~ VY\(m. ~.1- -~-kA IV \'" ~1o<v0 7sLU-tC1.C.st v-e-<(j plD-\. 5 - Le ~~1a ~ +- &J-L\O ~\-. cpnto.\rec L;bu.L0 ?-o-n\.ed ~ WDE' ; ~ ~~0 (C' ~ a.\(~) CLu. ~Q... ( is I ) Ioe c ~ ~ ~ v:L~ -\gj.,Q evu:l-~-\o CUJD'lct ~ ~ ~R .;;.. u\her ~9 pLckD- S(m ~ C~ \oLd ~') GJd~t.&Dn" W'\LD ~() ~l,:1 elo..-Lj) ~ CL\JLQO 0J~c-koJ-.dev/ ~ ~ hO(\K.l.\Onc ?-if L~b ~~1u~rtv~~-fU..tu...u- ~\~~1""'ro.\S\~Cl..S)\Ch.lk)'.~ ~ ~<1' iu-LL~~ ~ VO(. c02-X- tlJ(A- ~tL/ ~ ~()UCJJ dYtnV' ~~ ClAW- Co DW C' o.-NL9.. (UVJl"- ,<"Lac h. .1.) 0.<&. ci.!' ~ Q\' oH::._Jt9'"-fud , , \ &:VUp 6QJn ~~~<a5 ~) ~\ct"ee ., u:(L~ u'- ~~ dh~tu_:~ CS1tGj dl.Xt~~ ab. U1..L"'u) r,,~.ch ~ ::o::tL~~mOLJu'4 ---\hru ~f) ~~.SY3/~ u:!.-it= o..'OJJt L(){\'~~ o)-~ch- '-}2- Vprsiof}-1,0 (August 22, 2007) . 0..-..........\ , "r. Page 2 of 2 I :, I I ~ C10o-\::J tL'\(tf\l ~ ~L~ UXAO- rLtY\) plJ.ft' (lA~.G.J:J uU(YtlIol1- -;-tow) 'Ou..-\- ~ ueu-tv..-~ eg; ~ ~()JJ) ~ ma.{n ~ ~ ~ (Jh.o'\oS . Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Component: 37.7 acres Wetland Restoration Description: Coastal Plain small stream swamp Location within project: Southern (most of project) III. Success Criteria Evaluation: Component 10: 20031035-3 HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: water table within 12" of soil surface for at least 7% of GS (-17 consecutive days); comparison with reference in years with abnormal rainfall ~ Monitoring report indicates success ~ No . Observational field data agrees? Yes No based on mitigation plan? Yes No based on wetland type? Yes No Lis~ any r~maining.hYd!OIO~y, issues to address (e,g. rem~~nin~ ditches, excessive water, etc,): . ' ~2J,lt,.t (~:(0X (t:"S ctL,-; hO.lR. ~fLl' (()UL~Q_C;\ LhrOlYll-0Crr d r CLlLj~"'* -t> (uLQ (Ylt"\ c ut- c\.. L( '---' ((1(}1 L\"\ In U) [) (j ((l ':, ll'.- 2txJLo) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Inundated _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Drift lines _ Drainage patterns in wetlands _ Sediment deposits Water marks , _ fin l^-~"':-V_\'.,~ -- .. ----- ---- -------'.--- -- '--"-"-'--"--"T7-~------- ,--." -.-- ------------------ , SOILS - Approved Success Criteri~_~ / A) i Are soils hydric or becoming hydric ,-'-f..:s No List indicators of hydric soils: List any remaining soil issues to address (e,g. erosion, upland areas, etc.): VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species 320 3-year old TPA @ end of Year 3; 260 5-year old TPA @ : Species StOry TPA/% cover end of Year 5; up to 20% of community compositi~n may be 'r-i> 0\~ t 'CL (X"lr ~ I volunteers (R,M, sweet gum, loblolly, etc.) - remedial action : I '1 \jet, t4Lb r:Ao. fI\e c\ --IPA may be requ If vols > 20% deemed a problem n \ L , \ - - . Monitoring report indicates success? {!~ ~_o ) Average TPA for entire site (per report): -1lJ2 \../ Observational field data agrees? Yes No based on community composition? Yes No based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No Vegetation planted on site? @. No Date of last planting: 31 '?--CC-4 Vegetation growing successfully? @ No i Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation: , i Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas: I . Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover): List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc,): ~-,:~he~ cnlq ?':C\- LGI L 'L-l>O\)\.cU\.\('C\-rPA >,)c~ ,rn3,\A.:A~cn hc~\ 2'2b \)l(Ln:\eld~A , (L-\ cliff s.peCLfuJ); lei \)ClL\..\t\:Ji.l'\..S} ~\hu") ~\.{)\ \,r\.0,d LtCfO TPI\ (\1\CU\l\ \lD\, \~rS;I'\'l.fY\Lf\) < C\r<:r\(LLQ. I plo\-s :J'\l)LLx:d 2 2D-Cc-:tJ p~_(tnk_(l ~reAi '3 '10- (al../L' -TPA \ f\.cQ. vcl.tL >*~ Version 1,0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 4 Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of W ter Quality NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluati NCWAM Type on Site: Coastal ~"'" Riverine Monitoring report indicates succ8f~\ \.... Yes No _ Riparian Observational field data agrees? ;\ Yes No _ Non-riparian (wetter) Attach NCWAM analysis results t his report, , _ Non-riparian (drier) _______ __ _ ____ ______ _ _ ___ _----L-____ List any remaining NCWAM i ues to address (e,g. functionality, developing wetland type, 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.): - 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, areas of concern, and important field observations, - Additional notes related to evaluation of this component: Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 4 . , . Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Component: 8,7 acres Wetland Enhancement Description: Coastal Plain small stream swamp Location within project: Northeast edge III, Success Criteria Evaluation: HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Component 10: 20031035-4 Monitoring report indicates success Observational field data agrees? based on mitigation plan? based on wetland type? ~-------~--._--._--_._..._- ; List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g, remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.): Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Inundated _ Saturated in upper 12 inches Drift lines _ Drainage patterns in wetlands _ Sediment deposits Water marks SOILS - Approved Success Criteria: Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No List indicators of hydric soils: List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g, erosion, upland areas, etc.): 'VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species Species StOry TPA/% cover I Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Average TPA for entire site (per report): ! Observational field data agrees? Yes No I I 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 : 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,): Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 3 of 4 . , . Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality --- --------.----------..--- NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site: Coastal Riverine Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No _ Riparian Observational field data agrees? Yes No _ Non-riparian (wetter) Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report, _ Non-riparian (drier) List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g, functionality, developing wetland type, 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,): - 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, areas of concern, and important field observations, - Additional notes related to evaluation of this component: Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 4 of 4