PROCEDURAL GUIDANCE FOR EVALUATING WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECTS IN CALIFORNIA'S COASTAL ZONE
Sample Forms For Use In Reviewing Mitigation Plans and Permit Files and for Completing Site Evaluations
Checklist of Information Recommended for Inclusion in Compensatory Mitigation Plans
Included |
Omitted |
|
| |
Executive Summary | |
Project Description | ||
| Project location, maps (including aerial photos) | ||
| Project impacts | ||
Adversely Impacted Site | ||
| Ecological assessment of the habitats, functions, and values potentially lost or affected | ||
| Plants (species list) | ||
| Plants (special status species) | ||
| Animals (species list) | ||
| Animals ( special status species) | ||
| Exotic Species (plant and/or animal) | ||
| Water regime/Hydrology | ||
| Water quality | ||
| Soils/Substrate | ||
| Buffers/Surrounding Habitats/Surrounding Land Use | ||
Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards | ||
| Specific Goals (statements of project purpose and expected outcome) | ||
| Specific Objectives (specific actions, or steps taken to achieve the goals) | ||
| Performance standards: quantitative criteria to assess the attainment of goals/objectives | ||
| Time frame: statement of period over which attributes must be shown to be present | ||
Mitigation Site | ||
| Ecological assessment of the existing habitats, functions, and
values potentially lost Ecological assessment of the existing habitats, functions, and values potentially lost | ||
| Salvage plan (conserves plants and animals from the affected and/or mitigation site) | ||
| Site description, project concept drawing | ||
| Design Rationale | ||
Site Plan and Design | ||
| Site survey and topography | ||
| Specific design elements and construction methods for hydrology (e.g., water control structures, channels) | ||
| Specific design elements and construction methods for soil (e.g., sediment composition, top soil conservation) | ||
| Specific design elements and construction methods for ground
elevation changes (e.g., grading, or changes due to erosion or sedimentation) | ||
| Specific design elements and construction methods for buffer areas | ||
| Specific design for vegetation (species composition, exotics removal, sources of seeds) | ||
| Potential Problems and Remedial Measures (responsible entity) | ||
| Long-term Maintenance requirements (e.g., landscaping, erosion control, irrigation) | ||
Monitoring Program | ||
| Hydrology | ||
| Soils | ||
| Water quality | ||
| Plants | ||
| Animals | ||
| Success criteria for physical and chemical attributes ( e.g., hydrology, soils, water quality) | ||
| Success criteria for biological
attributes
(e.g., plant density, plant cover, bird abundance) | ||
| Timetable for reporting monitoring results | ||
Implementation Schedule | ||
| Construction schedule | ||
| Monitoring schedule |
PERMIT FILE REVIEW FORM
PERMIT NUMBER: |
APPLICANT: |
STAFF ANALYSTS: |
PERMIT APPROVAL DATE: |
PROJECT START DATE: |
PROJECT COMPLETED DATE: |
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF INFORMATION IF NOT IN THE PERMIT FILE | ||
| Wetland Mitigation project: ( ) Yes ( ) No | Wetland Restoration project: ( )Yes ( ) No | |
LOCATION OF ADVERSELY IMPACTED SITE | COUNTY: | CITY: |
DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED AREA INCLUDING SIZE: | ||
LOCATION OF MITIGATION/RESTORATION SITE: | COUNTY: | CITY: |
DESCRIPTION OF MITIGATION / RESTORATION SITE INCLUDING SIZE: | ||
Mitigation Attributes:
TYPE OF MITIGATION PROJECT:( ) Restoration ( ) Creation ( ) Enhancement ( ) In-kind ( ) Out-of-kind |
ACREAGE FOR EACH TYPE IF MORE THAN ONE : |
MITIGATION CONDUCTED:( ) On-site ( ) Off-site |
IF OFF-SITE, RELATIVE LOCATION OF IMPACT SITE VS. MITIGATION SITE (I.E., JURISDICTION, WATERSHED, ECOREGION ETC.): |
MITIGATION RATIO — ACRES MITIGATED: ACRES AFFECTED_____________________________________ : ___________________________________ |
TYPE OF RESTORATION PROJECT:( ) Restoration ( ) Creation ( ) Enhancement |
ACREAGE FOR EACH TYPE IF MORE THAN ONE: |
IS PRESERVATION/ACQUISITION A PROJECT COMPONENT?( ) Yes ( ) No |
IF YES, DESCRIBE WHAT IS BEING PRESERVED OR ACQUIRED, WHERE IT IS LOCATED, THE COSTS AND FUNDING SOURCES AND WHO WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY: |
WAS THERE AN ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE ADVERSELY IMPACTED SITE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION?( ) Yes ( ) No |
IF SO, LISTS THE REPORTS, CONCLUSIONS OF THE SITE EVALUATION: |
WAS THERE AN ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE MITIGATION SITE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION?( ) Yes ( ) No |
IF SO, LISTS THE REPORTS, CONCLUSIONS OF THE SITE EVALUATION: |
WAS THERE AN ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF A REFERENCE SITE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION?( ) Yes ( ) No |
WERE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES LISTED IN THE APPLICATION MATERIALS?( ) Yes ( ) No |
IF SO, LIST THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: |
GOAL: |
OBJECTIVES: |
WERE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR ASSESSING ATTAINMENT OF EACH GOAL/OBJECTIVE LISTED?( ) Yes ( ) No |
IF SO, LIST THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, OR SUCCESS CRITERIA: |
WAS A MONITORING PROGRAM INCLUDED?( ) Yes ( ) No |
LENGTH OF MONITORING PROGRAM: |
WHEN ARE MONITORING REPORTS DUE? |
BRIEFLY LIST THE PARAMETERS TO BE MONITORED: |
EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE: |
DO SUCCESSIVE MONITORING REPORTS DOCUMENT PERFORMANCE OF THE PROJECT?( ) Yes ( ) No |
IF YES, DOES THE DATA INDICATE THAT THE SYSTEM IS EVOLVING TO MEET THE GOALS, I.E., IS THE PERFORMANCE IMPROVING? |
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: |
MITIGATION/RESTORATION SITE EVALUATION FORM
DATE OF VISIT: |
EVALUATORS: |
Fill in this portion of the form before the site visit
Project Information:
PROJECT NAME AND DESCRIPTION: | |||
PERMIT NUMBER: | ANALYSTS: | ||
MITIGATION PROJECT LOCATION: |
CITY: |
COUNTY: | |
PERMIT APPROVAL DATE: | CONSTRUCTION START DATE: | PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: | |
| ( ) Mitigation or ( ) Restoration | |||
ADVERSELY IMPACTED AREA: | |||
ACRES | |||
HABITAT TYPE: | |||
MITIGATION SITE: | |||
| Acres: | ENHANCED: |
RESTORED: | CREATED: |
| Habitat type: | |||
RESTORATION SITE: | |||
| Acres: | ENHANCED: |
RESTORED: | CREATED: |
| Habitat type: | |||
PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (AS STATED IN THE FILE DOCUMENTS) | |||
GOAL: | |||
OBJECTIVES: | |||
WAS A MONITORING PROGRAM INCLUDED?( ) Yes ( ) No | |||
LENGTH OF MONITORING PROGRAM: | WHEN ARE MONITORING REPORTS DUE? | ||
BRIEFLY LIST THE PARAMETERS TO BE MONITORED: | |||
Fill in this portion of the form during the site visit
PHOTOS TAKEN? |
Habitat Characterization:
ADVERSELY IMPACTED SITE : | |
VEGETATION TYPES | |
PERCENT COVER VEGETATION |
PERCENT OPEN WATER: |
CURRENT CONDITION: | |
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: (E.G., BIRDS FEEDING, ETC.) | |
MITIGATION SITE: | |
VEGETATION TYPES | |
PERCENT COVER VEGETATION: | PERCENT OPEN WATER: |
MAINTENANCE STRUCTURES: | |
EVIDENCE OF CONSTRUCTION: | |
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: (E.G., BIRDS FEEDING, MAMMALS SEEN, OBSERVED DETRIMENTS TO WATER QUALITY, ETC.) | |
WERE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR ASSESSING ATTAINMENT OF EACH GOAL/OBJECTIVE LISTED?( ) Yes ( ) No | |
IF SO, LIST THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, OR SUCCESS CRITERIA: | |
Fill in this portion of the form after the site visit
BASED ON THE SITE EVALUATION, DOES THE MITIGATION OR RESTORATION WETLAND PERFORMANCE APPEAR TO BE( ) increasing? or ( ) decreasing? or ( ) mixed? |
WHY? |
DO CONDITIONS EXIST THAT REQUIRE REMEDIAL ACTION (E.G., REPAIR A MAINTENANCE STRUCTURE)?( ) Yes ( ) No |
REMEDIATION FOLLOW-UP |
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: |
EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE: |
DO SUCCESSIVE MONITORING REPORTS DOCUMENT PERFORMANCE OF THE PROJECT?( ) Yes ( ) No |
IF YES, DOES THE DATA INDICATE THAT THE SYSTEM IS EVOLVING TO MEET THE GOALS, I.E., IS THE PERFORMANCE IMPROVING? |
Return to Table
of Contents
Return to 10.
Case Studies
Return to Executive
Summary
Return to 6.
Mitigation Plan Development and Evaluation
Go to Appendix
B
Go to Literature
Cited
Go to Glossary
Return to
California Coastal Commission Publications Page
Return to
California Coastal Commission Home Page