NAME OF PROJECT CLOSEOUT REPORT: PROJECT TYPE
NAME OF PROJECT EEP ID (IMS#) FDP CONTRACT NUMBER USACE ACTION ID # DWQ 401#
CLOSEOUT REPORT: PROJECT TYPE (Project Type = Stream, Wetland, Buffer; note only the type of asset of MUs)
PHOTO THAT REPRESENTS THE PROJECT
Project Setting & Classifications Project Activities and Timeline
Meeting XY Coordinates: Enter xy of site visit meeting location here County General Location Basin: Physiographic Region: Ecoregion: USGS Hydro Unit: NCDWQ Sub-basin: Wetland Classification Thermal Regime: Trout Water:
Project Performers Source Agency: Provider: Designer: Monitoring Firm Channel Remediation Plant remediation Transferred Stewardship Stewards
Alexander Town/City nearby Catawba Piedmont Central Piedmont 03050101-120040 11-62-3-1 Warm No
WRP/DOT/EEP etc Firm X Firm Y; Firm Z Firm A Firm B Yes/NO NC, DOT, other
Milestone
Month-Year
Project Instituted Permitted Construction Completed As-built survey Monitoring Year-1 Minor Channel Repair Monitoring Year-2 Beaver removal Monitoring Year 3 Invasive Plant Control Monitoring Year 4 Invasive Plant Control Supplemental Planting Monitoring Year 5 Veg Monitoring Year 6 Closeout Submission
June 2000 April 2001 Oct 2001 Dec 2001 Oct 2002 Jan 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2004 June 2005 Oct 2005 June 2006 Dec 2006 Oct 2007 Sep 2008 Apr 2009
Project Setting and Background Summary (THIS SECTION SHOULD BE A SUMMARY OF FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT ACHIEVED THROGH THE PROJECT AND HOW THE UPLIFT WAS ACCOMLISHED. INCLUDE REPAIR SUMMARY AND SUMMARY OF UNIQUE PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS. DO NOT INCLUDE DATA THAT CAN BE PRESENTED IN TABULAR FASHION.) EXAMPLE: This stream rehabilitation project is one among others, which have been implemented along Little Sugar Creek to include segments above and directly below completed by the Clean Water Management Trust Fund and Charlotte/Mecklenburg stormwater services. Some level of scour and deposition is expected due to the dynamic nature of streams; however storms in 2005 and 2006 caused some erosion to the project in several areas totaling approximately 15% of the bank footage. Remediation for about two thirds of this footage was deemed advisable and was addressed in 2008. The remainder that was cataloged appeared to be minor and was beginning to re-vegetate and stabilize. The sites bank, bench and terrace vegetation has improved since 2006 when these adjustments were made. Three years after the localized repairs were implemented in 2008, the site exhibited stability. The site was also subjected to supplemental planting in the winter of 2011 with larger stems in areas that would benefit from them. The supplemental planting covered 1.4 acres, approximately 11% of the project’s easement. The largest area of supplemental planting was on the left bank on the terrace adjacent to the greenway, where maintenance crews were maintaining the understory under a stand of mature trees. The boundaries and restrictions were reiterated with city staff and steel bollards were put in place to demarcate the easement boundary moving into stewardship. Goals and Objectives (THIS SHOULD BE A CUT/PASTE FROM THE PLANS IN BULLET FORMAT FROM THE MITIGATION PLAN)
Success Criteria Include the success criteria summarized from the mitigation (or As-Built) plan. Tabular format is strongly suggested. Ensure hydrological success criteria are stated for wetlands. Success Criteria Measured Parameter Criteria Met Stream: Cross-section measurements should 4 Cross Sections – 2 riffle & 2 pool Yes – Cross section data indicates minor show little change from the as-built crossadjustments when compared to as-built cross sections. If changes do occur, section data they will be evaluated to determine whether they are minor adjustments associated with settling and increased stability or whether they indicate movement toward an unstable condition. Wetland: 8.5 % success criteria criteria for all 5 groundwater gauges Yes – four of five gauges exceeded the required wetland assets 8.5% hydrology in all years. Gauge 1 failed to meet success criteria in all years; the area surrounding gauge 1 was re-delineated. Vegetation: minimum of 260 stems per acre in 10 vegetation plots Yes – all10 plots exceeded 260 stems per acre year 5 Other
Table X. Project XYZ Creek (ID-123456) - Mitigation Components Existing
Resto red
Creditible
P ro ject
Wetland
Fo o tage
Fo o tage,
Fo o tage,
Co mpo nent
P o sitio n and
or
A creage,
A creage
(reach ID, etc.)
1
Hydro Type
2
o r SF
3
o r SF
A ppro ach Resto ratio n
P rio rity
M itigatio n
M itigatio n
Level
Level
Ratio (X:1)
Credits
4
A creage
Statio ning
XYZ M ain Upper
1020
10+00 -21+69
1169
1169
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1169 Easement
XYZ M ain Lo wer
904
22+19 -32+38
1019
1019
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1019 Easement
XYZ M ain P reservatio n
675
10+00 - 16+75
5010
5010
P
-
5
1002 Co nservatio n Easement
UT1
485
10+00 - 14+85
485
485
EII
-
2.5
194 Livesto ck Exclusio n, Invasive Co ntro l, A umtented Understo ry, Habitat Structures Dimensio n and P ro file mo dified in keeping with reference, livesto ck exclusio n, planting, permananent easement. 90 Feet remo ved fro m creditible fo o tage (50 due o t single sided 413 easement with 40 feet remo ved due to a 50% reductio n resulting fro m 80 feet o f utility cro ssings)
UT2
UT 3 (Headwater)
710
10+00 - 17+10
710
620
E1
P III
1.5
1908
10+00 - 30+54
2054
2044
R
Headwater
1
No tes/Co mments
Headwater resto ratio n - valley axis = asset length. 50% reductio n fro m a 20 fo o t utility cro ssing. 2044 Remo ved 10 feet o f creditible fo o tage P lanted, excluded livesto ck, remediated co mpactio n and enco mpassess sectio n o f prio rity 1reach. 4.63 0.66 acres impacted by utility @ 50%, creditible acreage reduced by 0.33 acres
Wetland Gro up 1
RR
4.96
4.96
4.63
R
1
Wetland Gro up 2
RNR
1.12
1.12
1.12
R
1
Wetland Gro up 3
NR
0.86
0.86
0.76
R
1
Remo ved ditching in a seep wetland o utside riparian zo ne. 0.2 acres o f wetland impacted @ 50% by 0.76 utility reducing creditibale acreage by 0.1acres
Wetland Gro up 4
RR
7.86
7.86
7.86
E
2
3.93 Excluded Livesto ck, plugged ditches - hydro enhancement.
Wetland Gro up 5
NR
0
2.11
2.11
C
3
Remo ved abo ut 4 inches o f o verburden neighbo ring P I reach, so ils bo rderline at time o f pre-co n 0.70 assessment, expect develo pment o f features with P I, planted and excluded livesto ck
Wetland Gro up 6
RR
11.4
11.4
10.6
P
5
2.12 Co nservatio n Easement. 1.6 acres o f preservatio n impacted @ 50% by utilities. Remo ved 0.8 acres
B uffer Gro up 1
67,541
67,541
R
1
67,541 Resto red riparian buffer fo r buffer credit
B uffer Gro up 2
16,456
16,456
E
2
8,228 Supplemented riparian buffer plantings
B uffer Gro up 3
485,126
472,168
P
5
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Resto ratio n Level
Resto ratio n
Riparian Wetland
No n-riparian Wetland
(linear feet)
(acres)
(acres)
Credited B uffer (square feet)
0.76
67,541
4232
Enhancement
No n-Riverine
4.63
1.12
7.86
Enhancement I
620
Enhancement II
485
Creatio n P reservatio n High Quality P res
2.11 5010
10.6
P reserved riparian buffer fo r B uffer Credit. 12,958 SF remo ved fro m creditible buffer to 94,434 acco mmo date utilities
Overall Assets Summary
Stream
Riverine
1.12 P lugged a ditch, planted and augmented a to e o f slo pe seep within the riparian zo ne
472,168
Asset Category
Overall Credits
Stream RP Wetland NR Wetland Buffer
5,841 11.80 1.46 170,203
Asset Map: Include all project assets by reach and wetland as indicted in Asset Table, include monitoring stations (vegetation plots, cross sections, gauges). Format the page layout to best fit the project map, separate Asset Map and Monitoring Station Map if necessary.
Project X Topographic Map (project extent and watershed delineated)
Project X Soils Map (use project specific delineation if available, if not use NRCS soils map with soil series clearly labeled.
Project X Remediation Map Include any supplemental planting zones and/or repair areas.
Stream Morphology Data: Cross Sections, Longitudinal Profiles, & Morphology Table
Project X Hydrology: Verification of Bankfull Events Table, Historic Vs. Average Rainfall Graph, Wetland Gauge Data
Project X Vegetation Data:
EEP Recommendation and Conclusion Briefly summarize the performance standards achieved the ecological value of the mitigation and include a statement that requests the project close with the mitigation units as shown in the Asset Table- Overall Credits section.
Contingencies Do not include ongoing treatments/work in this section such as currently contracted invasive treatment or beaver management. This section is reserved for items that should appear in the IRT closeout summary.
Project X Pre & Post Construction Photos: Include photos of representative reaches
Appendix A: Watershed Planning Context of Project X (To be completed by EEP Planer)
Appendix B: Property Ownership & Protection (To be completed by EEP Property Specialist)
Appendix C: Permits & Jurisdictional Determinations (Insert 404, 401, and any associated JD available)
Appendix D: Debit Ledger (To be inserted by closeout coordinator)
Appendix E: Additional Data (Reserved for any additional data necessary to support project closure)
CLOSEOUT REPORT: PROJECT TYPE (Project Type = Stream, Wetland, Buffer; note only the type of asset of MUs)
PHOTO THAT REPRESENTS THE PROJECT
Project Setting & Classifications Project Activities and Timeline
Meeting XY Coordinates: Enter xy of site visit meeting location here County General Location Basin: Physiographic Region: Ecoregion: USGS Hydro Unit: NCDWQ Sub-basin: Wetland Classification Thermal Regime: Trout Water:
Project Performers Source Agency: Provider: Designer: Monitoring Firm Channel Remediation Plant remediation Transferred Stewardship Stewards
Alexander Town/City nearby Catawba Piedmont Central Piedmont 03050101-120040 11-62-3-1 Warm No
WRP/DOT/EEP etc Firm X Firm Y; Firm Z Firm A Firm B Yes/NO NC, DOT, other
Milestone
Month-Year
Project Instituted Permitted Construction Completed As-built survey Monitoring Year-1 Minor Channel Repair Monitoring Year-2 Beaver removal Monitoring Year 3 Invasive Plant Control Monitoring Year 4 Invasive Plant Control Supplemental Planting Monitoring Year 5 Veg Monitoring Year 6 Closeout Submission
June 2000 April 2001 Oct 2001 Dec 2001 Oct 2002 Jan 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2004 June 2005 Oct 2005 June 2006 Dec 2006 Oct 2007 Sep 2008 Apr 2009
Project Setting and Background Summary (THIS SECTION SHOULD BE A SUMMARY OF FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT ACHIEVED THROGH THE PROJECT AND HOW THE UPLIFT WAS ACCOMLISHED. INCLUDE REPAIR SUMMARY AND SUMMARY OF UNIQUE PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS. DO NOT INCLUDE DATA THAT CAN BE PRESENTED IN TABULAR FASHION.) EXAMPLE: This stream rehabilitation project is one among others, which have been implemented along Little Sugar Creek to include segments above and directly below completed by the Clean Water Management Trust Fund and Charlotte/Mecklenburg stormwater services. Some level of scour and deposition is expected due to the dynamic nature of streams; however storms in 2005 and 2006 caused some erosion to the project in several areas totaling approximately 15% of the bank footage. Remediation for about two thirds of this footage was deemed advisable and was addressed in 2008. The remainder that was cataloged appeared to be minor and was beginning to re-vegetate and stabilize. The sites bank, bench and terrace vegetation has improved since 2006 when these adjustments were made. Three years after the localized repairs were implemented in 2008, the site exhibited stability. The site was also subjected to supplemental planting in the winter of 2011 with larger stems in areas that would benefit from them. The supplemental planting covered 1.4 acres, approximately 11% of the project’s easement. The largest area of supplemental planting was on the left bank on the terrace adjacent to the greenway, where maintenance crews were maintaining the understory under a stand of mature trees. The boundaries and restrictions were reiterated with city staff and steel bollards were put in place to demarcate the easement boundary moving into stewardship. Goals and Objectives (THIS SHOULD BE A CUT/PASTE FROM THE PLANS IN BULLET FORMAT FROM THE MITIGATION PLAN)
Success Criteria Include the success criteria summarized from the mitigation (or As-Built) plan. Tabular format is strongly suggested. Ensure hydrological success criteria are stated for wetlands. Success Criteria Measured Parameter Criteria Met Stream: Cross-section measurements should 4 Cross Sections – 2 riffle & 2 pool Yes – Cross section data indicates minor show little change from the as-built crossadjustments when compared to as-built cross sections. If changes do occur, section data they will be evaluated to determine whether they are minor adjustments associated with settling and increased stability or whether they indicate movement toward an unstable condition. Wetland: 8.5 % success criteria criteria for all 5 groundwater gauges Yes – four of five gauges exceeded the required wetland assets 8.5% hydrology in all years. Gauge 1 failed to meet success criteria in all years; the area surrounding gauge 1 was re-delineated. Vegetation: minimum of 260 stems per acre in 10 vegetation plots Yes – all10 plots exceeded 260 stems per acre year 5 Other
Table X. Project XYZ Creek (ID-123456) - Mitigation Components Existing
Resto red
Creditible
P ro ject
Wetland
Fo o tage
Fo o tage,
Fo o tage,
Co mpo nent
P o sitio n and
or
A creage,
A creage
(reach ID, etc.)
1
Hydro Type
2
o r SF
3
o r SF
A ppro ach Resto ratio n
P rio rity
M itigatio n
M itigatio n
Level
Level
Ratio (X:1)
Credits
4
A creage
Statio ning
XYZ M ain Upper
1020
10+00 -21+69
1169
1169
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1169 Easement
XYZ M ain Lo wer
904
22+19 -32+38
1019
1019
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1019 Easement
XYZ M ain P reservatio n
675
10+00 - 16+75
5010
5010
P
-
5
1002 Co nservatio n Easement
UT1
485
10+00 - 14+85
485
485
EII
-
2.5
194 Livesto ck Exclusio n, Invasive Co ntro l, A umtented Understo ry, Habitat Structures Dimensio n and P ro file mo dified in keeping with reference, livesto ck exclusio n, planting, permananent easement. 90 Feet remo ved fro m creditible fo o tage (50 due o t single sided 413 easement with 40 feet remo ved due to a 50% reductio n resulting fro m 80 feet o f utility cro ssings)
UT2
UT 3 (Headwater)
710
10+00 - 17+10
710
620
E1
P III
1.5
1908
10+00 - 30+54
2054
2044
R
Headwater
1
No tes/Co mments
Headwater resto ratio n - valley axis = asset length. 50% reductio n fro m a 20 fo o t utility cro ssing. 2044 Remo ved 10 feet o f creditible fo o tage P lanted, excluded livesto ck, remediated co mpactio n and enco mpassess sectio n o f prio rity 1reach. 4.63 0.66 acres impacted by utility @ 50%, creditible acreage reduced by 0.33 acres
Wetland Gro up 1
RR
4.96
4.96
4.63
R
1
Wetland Gro up 2
RNR
1.12
1.12
1.12
R
1
Wetland Gro up 3
NR
0.86
0.86
0.76
R
1
Remo ved ditching in a seep wetland o utside riparian zo ne. 0.2 acres o f wetland impacted @ 50% by 0.76 utility reducing creditibale acreage by 0.1acres
Wetland Gro up 4
RR
7.86
7.86
7.86
E
2
3.93 Excluded Livesto ck, plugged ditches - hydro enhancement.
Wetland Gro up 5
NR
0
2.11
2.11
C
3
Remo ved abo ut 4 inches o f o verburden neighbo ring P I reach, so ils bo rderline at time o f pre-co n 0.70 assessment, expect develo pment o f features with P I, planted and excluded livesto ck
Wetland Gro up 6
RR
11.4
11.4
10.6
P
5
2.12 Co nservatio n Easement. 1.6 acres o f preservatio n impacted @ 50% by utilities. Remo ved 0.8 acres
B uffer Gro up 1
67,541
67,541
R
1
67,541 Resto red riparian buffer fo r buffer credit
B uffer Gro up 2
16,456
16,456
E
2
8,228 Supplemented riparian buffer plantings
B uffer Gro up 3
485,126
472,168
P
5
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Resto ratio n Level
Resto ratio n
Riparian Wetland
No n-riparian Wetland
(linear feet)
(acres)
(acres)
Credited B uffer (square feet)
0.76
67,541
4232
Enhancement
No n-Riverine
4.63
1.12
7.86
Enhancement I
620
Enhancement II
485
Creatio n P reservatio n High Quality P res
2.11 5010
10.6
P reserved riparian buffer fo r B uffer Credit. 12,958 SF remo ved fro m creditible buffer to 94,434 acco mmo date utilities
Overall Assets Summary
Stream
Riverine
1.12 P lugged a ditch, planted and augmented a to e o f slo pe seep within the riparian zo ne
472,168
Asset Category
Overall Credits
Stream RP Wetland NR Wetland Buffer
5,841 11.80 1.46 170,203
Asset Map: Include all project assets by reach and wetland as indicted in Asset Table, include monitoring stations (vegetation plots, cross sections, gauges). Format the page layout to best fit the project map, separate Asset Map and Monitoring Station Map if necessary.
Project X Topographic Map (project extent and watershed delineated)
Project X Soils Map (use project specific delineation if available, if not use NRCS soils map with soil series clearly labeled.
Project X Remediation Map Include any supplemental planting zones and/or repair areas.
Stream Morphology Data: Cross Sections, Longitudinal Profiles, & Morphology Table
Project X Hydrology: Verification of Bankfull Events Table, Historic Vs. Average Rainfall Graph, Wetland Gauge Data
Project X Vegetation Data:
EEP Recommendation and Conclusion Briefly summarize the performance standards achieved the ecological value of the mitigation and include a statement that requests the project close with the mitigation units as shown in the Asset Table- Overall Credits section.
Contingencies Do not include ongoing treatments/work in this section such as currently contracted invasive treatment or beaver management. This section is reserved for items that should appear in the IRT closeout summary.
Project X Pre & Post Construction Photos: Include photos of representative reaches
Appendix A: Watershed Planning Context of Project X (To be completed by EEP Planer)
Appendix B: Property Ownership & Protection (To be completed by EEP Property Specialist)
Appendix C: Permits & Jurisdictional Determinations (Insert 404, 401, and any associated JD available)
Appendix D: Debit Ledger (To be inserted by closeout coordinator)
Appendix E: Additional Data (Reserved for any additional data necessary to support project closure)
