Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20061760 Ver 2_Mitigation Evaluation_20090225Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Date of Office Review: Evaluator's Name(s): Date of Report: Report for Monitoring Year: Date of Field Review: -?1- 02 J 'C'I Evaluator's Name(s):?tl Other Individuals/Agencies Present: C? P? ?CB "A, Ck- . 1. C C - Weather Conditions (today & recent): Directions to Site: From US 29 go east on McGill Ave NW to Central Dr NW. South on Central Dr to left turn in road (Misneheimer Dr NW). Project is north and south of Misenheimer Dr. 1. Office Review Information: Project Number: 20061760 Project Name: Stricker Branch County(ies): Cabarrus Basin & subbasin: Yadkin 03040105 Nearest Stream: Stricker Branch Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: C Mitigator Type: Full-Delivery DOT Status: non-DOT S't Project History Event Event Date Application Review - Streams 1/23/2007 Site Visit - Streams 9/25/2007 Report Receipt: Monitoring 12/8/2008 Total Mitigation on i e Wetland: Stream: 3000 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: 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 20061760-1 3000 linear feet Stream Restoration 1 ^' t 3DD' qL0 ru7 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.): 1 tiY1 0 vit h'c ?51n Lrv\-a Clsrt ?cc ht-yl- i l_ciir( ?u r 00 rvw?c h ?v,cu? 51 u.l?l C b1?ti l l C wt' - > > r cve Icx ?+ ran S?-c??lk, L?:>?ctq ut--? 1.i1 ?lCdl ?'lavt C-?'OYl t.Y.' 1 cY1 ?l•`C Zv L (o llrl?fy^ C?? s?c? ??ae1c -1 pC CS1 cL_cd R to Ad 0- VDAA?Qj ,xxr :q vt O?L - pul ?.Oi,CU? - ; c?ci2 _)S. CA t ,bra,, ,plc f"lC? . LIDS L7 an L cf IDo_.C) r JQ- 4tA`V? r ?.L (l + ..1 11_kc L C 1'?LS ti t E S (? . ?J? J?C. h D`? ?IDC?? Ckcv PL"cl7 t 1? (r ill i hC<" 1 Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2 Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Component: 3000 linear feet Stream Restoration 1 Component ID: 20061760-1 Description: Location within project: III. Success Criteria Evaluation: STREAMBANK STABILITY - Approved Success Criteria: Are streambanks stable? Yes No If no, provide description and notes regarding stability issues: STRUCTURES - Approved Success Criteria: 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: FEATURES - Approved Success Criteria: 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: 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 T VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species Species Story TPAI'1o cover t ? Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Average TPA for entire site (per rep ort): 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 General observations on condition of ripari an/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, 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 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