HomeMy WebLinkAboutContract 32301-IP1•
Regulatory Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
FORT WORTH DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. 0. BOX 17300
FORT WORTH , TEXAS 76102-0300
June 26 , 2018
CITY SECRETARY
CONTRACTNO. 3;)30/-IP/
SUBJECT: Project Number SWF-2010-00470 , Lebow Channel Improvements
Ms . Susan Alanis
Assistant City Manager
City of Fort Worth
1000 Throckmorton Street
Fort Worth , Texas 76102
Dear Ms . Alanis :
You are hereby authorized under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act to d ischarge dredged and
fill material into waters of the United States in accordance with Permit Number SWF-2010-00470 .
A copy of the permit is enclosed .
To use this permit , the person responsible for the project must ensure that the work is
conducted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the permit. We caution you to submit
revised drawings to us for approval prior to construction should any changes be found necessary in
either the location or plans for the work . Approval of revised plans may be granted if they are found
not contrary to the public interest.
This permit should not be considered as an approval of the design features of any structure
authorized or an implication that such construction is considered adequate for the purpose
intended. It does not authorize any damage to private property , invasion of private rights , or any
infringement of federal , state , or local laws or regulations .
We appreciate your interest in our nation's water resources , and your cooperation in complying
with our regulatory program. If you have questions in the future , please contact Mr. Neil Lebsock at
the address above or telephone (817) 886-17 43.
Qc~4JL
~' Stephen L Brooks
Chief, Regulatory Division
OFFICIAL RECORD
CITY SECRETARY
FT. WORTH, TX
Enclosures
Copies Furnished / with enclosure:
Mr. David Galindo
Director, Office of Water Quality (MC-150)
Water Quality Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
P.O . Box 13087
Austin , Texas 78711-3087
Mr. Tom Heger
Resource Protection Division
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
4200 Smith School Road
Austin , Texas 78744
Ms . Debra Bills
Field Supervisor
U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service
2005 NE Green Oaks Blvd ., Suite 140
Arlington , Texas 76006
Ms. Maria Martinez
-2-
Chief, Marine and Wetlands Section (6WQ-EM)
U.S . Environmental Protection Agency , Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas , Texas 75202
•
NPTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Ms. Susan Alanis -City of Fort Worth I File Number: SWF-2010-00470 Date: June 26, 2018
Attached is : See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
X PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I -The following identifies your rights and options regarding an a,drninistrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information may be found at
htm ://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Ci vil W orks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits/ appeals.asgx or Corps
regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. '
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: lfyou received a Standard Permit, yo u may s ign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If yo u received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorize d . Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, includin g its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determination s associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If yo u object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein , yo u may request that
the permit be modified accordingly . You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to th e district engineer.
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice , or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)
modi fy the permit to address all of your concerns , (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit havin g determined that the permit should be issued as previous ly written. After evaluating your objections, th e
district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration , as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, yo u may sign the permit document and return it to the di strict engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permi t or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in it s entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit , including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determ inations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to declin e the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) becaus e of certain terms and conditions therein, yo u
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the divi s ion engineer within 60 days of the
date of this notice .
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process
by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD . Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date
of this notice , mean s that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD .
• APPEAL: If you di sagree with th e approved JD , yo u may appeal the approved JD und er the Corps of Engi neers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the divi s ion engineer. This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD . The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
...
SECTION II -REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS : (Describe your rea sons for appealing the decision or your objections to ~n
initial proffered permit in clear conci se statements . You may attach additiona l infomiation to this form to clarify where yo~ reasons
or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that th e review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new in fo rmation or analyses to the record . However,
you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record .
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal
process you may contact:
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Elliott Carman
Admini strative App eal s Review Officer (CESWD-PD-O)
U.S. Army Co rp s of E ng ineers
1100 Commerce Str et, Suite 83 I
Da ll as, Texas 75242-1317
469-487-706 1
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engin eers personn e l, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigation s of the project site during the course of the appeal process . You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation , and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date: Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
Permittee: City of Fort Worth
Permit No .: SWF-2010-00470
Issuing Office : Fort Worth District
NOTE : The term "you" and its derivatives , as used in this permit, means the permittee or any future
transferee . The term "this office " refers to the appropriate district or division office of the Corps of
Engineers having jurisdiction over the permitted activity or the appropr iate official of that office
acting under the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Description: Approximately 6 ,656 Cubic Yards (CY) of dredged and fill material would
be discharged into approximately 13 ,313 Linear Feet (LF) of an intermittent tributary (Lebow
Channel), 684 LF of an ephemera l tributary (unnamed), and 0.54 acre of forested wetlands .
The discharge of dredged and fill material is associated with mechanized grading and channel
improvements in the Upper and Lower Lebow Channel Improvement Project. The Lower
Lebow channel improvements would consist of expanding channel capacity by excavating a 30
-50-foot earthen channel with 50 -75 -foot wide banks and a low-flow channel in the bottom.
Additionally , two bypass/overflow channels would be constructed to aid in reducing the
floodplain . Additionally , stream restoration activities would occur on the Lower Lebow Channel.
The Upper Lebow , comprising of higher density residential lots , would consist of hard armoring
with gabions along the stream banks and a widened , lowered , natural channel bottom averaging
40 -feet wide. Addit ionally , a storm water detention pond would be constructed on-channel in the
Upper Lebow and would consist of deep and shallow emergent wetlands , and native grass
plantings .
Project Location : The center of the proposed project is approximately at E Long Avenue at the
Lebow Channel in Tarrant County , Texas , on the Haltom City 7.5-m inute USGS quadrangle
map in the USGS Hydrologic Unit 12030102.
Lat. 32.798454 , Lon . -97 .337091
Permit Conditions: In accordance with the general conditions and the special conditions below ,
the attached Sheets 1-17 of 17 dated June 2010 , and Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality Section 401 Water Quality Certification , Pages 1-3 of 3, dated May 9 , 2018.
General Conditions :
1. The time limit for completing the work authorized ends on Dec. 31, 2023. If you find that you
need more time to complete the authorized activity , submit your request for a time extension to th is
office for consideration at least one month before the date is reached .
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance
with the terms and conditions of this perm it. You are not relieve d of this requirement if you abandon
the permitted activity , although you may make a good faith tra nsfer to a third party in compliance
with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain the authorized activity or
should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, y ou must obtain a modification of this
permit from this office , which may require restoration of the are a .
3. If you discover any previously unknown historic or archaeol ogical remains while accomplishing
the activity authorized by this permit , you must immediately notify this office of what you have
found . We will initiate the Federal and state coordination re quired to determine if the remains
warrant a recovery effort o r if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places .
4 . If you sell the property associated with this permit , you m ust obtain the signature of the new
owner in the space provided and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of
this authorization.
5. If a conditioned water quality certification has been issued fo r your project , you must comply with
the conditions specified in the certification as special co nditions to this permit. For your
convenience , a copy of the certification is attached if it contains such conditions .
6. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect t he authorized activity at any time
deemed necessary to ensure that it is being or has been accomplished in accordance with the
terms and conditions of your permit.
Special Conditions: SEE PAGE 4 (Special Conditions)
Further Information :
1. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to und e rtake the activity described above
pursuant to :
( ) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C . 403).
(x) Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U .S.C . 1344).
( ) Section 103 of the Marine Protection , Research and Sa nctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C.
1413).
2. Limits of this authorization .
a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Fe deral , state , or local authorizations
required by law.
b . This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges .
c . This permit does not authorize any injury to the property o r rights of others .
2
d . This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
3 . Limits of Federal Liability. In issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any
liability for the following:
a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted
activities or from natural causes .
b. Damages to the permitted, roJ~qt or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities
undertaken by or on behalf of the 11:JrtiM '~~tt;s ·in,tHe p~Hl iWOr.t!eir~t.
c. Damages to persons, pro13erty, or to othe L er_mitted or unpermitted activities or structures
caused by the activity authorized by this permit. -. -;-,---:--,.~
d . Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work.
e. Damage claims associated with any future modification , suspension, or revocation of this
permit. · .• · , . · ·, .~ . . .. .. '" " '~
4 . Reliance on Applicant's Data : The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not
contrary to the public interest was made in reliance on the information you provided.
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any
time the circumstances warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include , but are
not limited to , the following :
a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
b . The information provided by you in support of your permit application proves to have been
false, incomplete , or inaccurate (See 4 above).
c. Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original
public interest decision .
Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension,
modification , and revocation procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures
such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The referenced enforcement procedures
provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms and
conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required
to pay for any corrective measures ordered by this office, and if you fail to comply with such
directive , this office may in certain situations (such as those specified in 33 CFR 209 .170)
accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the cost.
6. Extensions . General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity
authorized by this permit. Unless there are circumstances requiring either a prompt completion of
the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the public interest decision , the Corps will normally give
3
favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit.
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms
and conditions of this permit.
(PEt/ii:=~
Susan Alanis ArPROVEO~S TO rOR~AANDLE<iALT:,,,,J
Assistant City Manager ~ //J /wk '71
CITTATTORNEY
(DATE)
This permit becomes effective when the Federal official , designated to act for the Secretary of the
Ar , ha signed below.
(D/STR
(FOR)
Calvin C . Hudson II
Colonel , Corps of Engineers
(DATE)
When the structures or work authorized by this permit are still in existence at the time the property
is transferred, the terms and conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the new
owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit and the associated liabilities
associated with compliance with its terms and conditions , have t he transferee sign and date below.
(TRANSFEREE)
4
(DATE)
OFF ICI AL RECORD
CITY SECRETARY
fT. WORTH, TX
Special Conditions
Permit Number SWF-2010-00470
(1) The permittee shall implement and abide by the mitigation plan titled "LEBOW DRAINAGE
SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN" prepared by Integrated Environmental Solutions , LLC , dated
August 24 , 2017 . The permittee shall implement the mitigation plan concurrently with the construction of
the project and complete the initial construction and plantings associated with the permittee responsible
mitigation work concurrently with the Lower Lebow work plan . Completion of all elements of this mitigation
plan is a requirement of this permit.
(2) The permittee shall debit 2 ,488 .2 credits from the Mill Branch Mitigation Bank in compliance with the
provisions of the "Mill Branch Mitigation Bank Mitigation Banking Instrument" dated March 2012 . This
debit shall compensate off-site for unavoidable adverse project impacts that would not be compensated
for by on-site mitigation. The permittee shall complete the mitigation bank transaction and provide
documentation to the USACE that the transaction has occurred prior to commencing any ground-
disturbing activity within waters of the United States associated with an Upper Lebow segment. As such ,
the credit purchase may be sequenced with segment impacts as identified on Table 8 of the mitigation
plan referenced in Special Condition 1 above .
(3) The permittee shall debit 28.4 credits from the Trinity River Mitigation Bank in compliance with the
provisions of the "Mitigation Banking Instrument Agreement , Trinity River Mitigation Bank , Ltd ., Tarrant
County, Texas , Permit Application No .: 199800370," dated February 2001 , revised August 2002 . This
debit shall compensate off-site for unavoidable adverse project impacts that would not be compensated
for by on-site mitigation . The permittee shall complete the mitigation bank transaction and provide
documentation to the USACE that the transaction has occurred prior to commencing any ground-
disturbing activity within waters of the United States associated with an Upper Lebow segment. As such,
the credit purchase may be sequenced with segment impacts as identified on Table 8 of the mitigation
plan referenced in Special Condition 1 above.
(4) The permittee shall retain a qualified mitigation specialist (biologist , ecologist or other specialist qualified
in stream and wetland restoration , enhancement , and creation work), to oversee project construction to
the extent necessary to ensure compliance with all mitigation requirements of this permit. The permittee
shall have this mitigation specialist conduct all monitoring and produce any required monitoring reports .
(5) During construction , a qualified archeologist w ill periodically monitor the permit area for the presence of
buried features or sites. If buried cultural remains are encountered during construction , the remains shall
be avoided and the USACE contacted to assess the site for eligibility to the National Register of Historic
Places and to comply with 33CFR325 (Appendix C) and 36 CFR 800 .
(6) The permittee shall conduct meeting(s) w ith the construction contractor(s) detailing the terms and
conditions of this permit prior to commencing construction activities of the project. The permittee shall
notify the Regulatory Division , Fort Worth District , USACE of the preconstruction contractor meeting(s) at
least two weeks in advance of the meeting(s). Within two weeks following the meeting(s), the permittee
shall provide written confirmation to the USACE that the meeting(s) was/were held.
5
.... + g -----·
8'!' 0Al(
P1«JPOSED 100-r7I
fl.OOOPt.AJN
H .;,,,,,:..;.;l
"' "' + 0
0
-r:~------.i -
/'')
' .,,,,,,.,,
,,/'
~
-\' y
~-
=t =1EA=G:::::;;UE=NALL~=A=N.=D=Pi:::;:::'E.='R=:aK;=:IN.=S=
Tlilt ... _, II ,., WT!wt,... ,_.,,..,..,._II Nt
.-,~ i.. c.,..tnM:UM, ~ .-~ffllt
Pinlll ..
INC.
ttOO M•c •n S l r ••f
Fort Worth , T•1t •• ,,,0 2 ,.,u" t ;U 1111 II •• 1 ,, •,.a :" 11 11 ,,. ,, ,,
w ww.,•~••1tlh1•.c••
I --''"""'"'--''..:De:.:"'"-'"'--l'L 0.tlll
,
I
,
;
Sheet 1 of 17
Schematic Plan • Drai nage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USAGE Project No SWF-2010--00470
--C
r--_---'
-----
\
\
\
)
~--(
BY OAT(
' ' ~ ' ' I
I
\ Pf?OPOSED 100-'l'R
', llOOOPI.AIN
' '
I I '
urrcn"f: 100-m~,
\ __ ,----~ .... ,, ,,
I
l I
I N C.
lloct)PUJN /
'-'
TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS
,,o o M•oo n a t,o•t
For t Wor t h , T •:,c•• r ero~ nun•:<• r 7/J ,, • a 7 ,., • Fa •:f It 11,,, -1,"
•ww .r11••011ll11 •.c•• , ..... ,~
--\
\
\
\
'
Sheet 2 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed Ci ty of Fort Worth , Texas
USACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
~ . . ~
' ' ~----
: .'1!'...-'.C,____ ---r -~-.,..--
/ ;' .., ----•
\ I _, _.. ... -.. ,' /
-
'
---------__.,, --:/-----_-s::.::.----
• _.-· .-'\,_EFTECTIVC I
-. OOOPl:AIH \ /r ---_/,,,-~
/1-' / ,,-_________ ,
/' I ,, -
---~ -. -.... _-:_~
~ ;---/ --~---------~ --~ ~~-------:::-'
--= ::;:.,,_... -~-' -~-:--,,-=---...=
/ ~~ -~
TEAGUE NAU AND PERKINS
r,oo M•con .srr•••
Fort wo,rtt , T•••• reto•
l'll•••~f• t7IJ JI •IT TJ • F• •:t• t TIJJf •II rJ ....... , .. , .. ,.,,,. .....
'rhltl......,_..,1 i.1.,.a,,,.,..,,...._.,."-'
il'II~ lor c.,.•~tbl....,.,. • ~ ..,,... Sheet 3 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USAGE Project No S\NF-2010-00470
;
·1
.-----i--l--l fORT ;o Tl{ _i_
1~0. R['Jl510H D'f DAT£ JUNE 2010
PROPOSED 100->R
n()(}()PLAJN
1EAGUE NALL AND PERKINS
r,o o Ma oon .s ,, •• ,
tr ort Wo rt h , T•1r •• r e,a z ,.,. •••:I• t1 J.J J ••f r 13 • ,. x :18, ,J a,,. 2 11 :, •-•·'••••11 11 11 •.c••
b..i.J W
CSUPtilC SCAlt
I
;..1:.~ t ~~-~
-~ =-~--_.,.:...=;.:..,,,;,;;.--~
:,.~~ ;;,/ --r·· r
:::::r--:-----;: -_,/
\ OJ (..() -~----_ _,_.,,..
11th~-, .. .., lilt."' ............. ....
lfll..wlfll IOI'" -.t1n1C1""-llot1'1lnf er JN'fflll _, ..
I--"""''''-':...:;'""'""--P (, DIil• --
Sheet 4 of 17
Schematic Plan • Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort \North , Texas
USAGE Project No S'l,/F-2010-00470
10 "'"''""' BY DATE
fQRT WOK!!! r,,,~
-~ -JUNE 2010
1
-✓
TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS
"oo M•con 5tr••t ,,.,, w.,,,,, ., •••• 1•101
~If •1t•:(I I 1)JJ 8 •11 Tl• f'•i :11 '1JI 1 I • ZI n
www.l•p-o1tll1te .c••
I/
n.:..~, .. ,,,,i.., ...... , ....... ""'ltt ~'""'""to, ,..,.,,,.,ictlllf\,..,c,.,., ... llrfft)t ......... Sheet 5 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, Texas
USAGE Project No SWF-2010-00470
FORT WORTH ~"'-I
l-,.-.+----RC\I-S,_0,_1 ___ 4-BY-+D-A-1£--j ~
TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS
r,oo M•con Str••'
Fort Worlh, TeAa• 7ffl0~
,1to111 :t II t1 )J JI · I 7 r J • '• ll .'U t71111. flf'l
www ,t111•111•""•·c••
STA 79+50
Sheet 6 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USAGE Project No SVIIF-2010-00470
I
I
I
//--// -,1/ ,
""· """""'"
--
fORT,ORTl{~1--:~_,,_~:~,.,."'":~_, ~ ~~:,~.~~~;:~~~NS
DY DATE w-ww .tlf••••ll,i•••••
I
£/TfCT/1£ 100-'11?-~-nOOOPLAIN
.:..J ,~ --------
EmCTI\£ 1qo--r(r--
FtOOOPUJN
Sheet 7 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, Texas
USAGE Project No SWF-2010-00470
I
I
~ \
' ' ' \
\
·' \
\
\
\
\ {ffF[Cf/"1: 100-Yff .. R.OOOPI.AJN
'\
\
--;_.--
r~'.,,r"'-._
I , t
·' \!/ \ ..
\ -' -,,,.
\ '\...... ..... • ',, -~ ~~\
'·-------------~'', ~~
C.)
,, I --_,_
'-'\ ~-""
-~?
I ----.
---\ --I --.-\-
T' I .-~ -\ \ ~~\
I
\I ~-
'~ TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS ... ==================
INC.
noo Al ■oon a,, •• ,
F•.rt Wo r tlt . T•x •• r1 1oa
,,,,., .. :(8 ITl3:J l •l111 • F ■ A :ll 1 ,a,,.z, ,,
www .f•1••""~•.c••
\
n,i.. --· It ,,,, 'itlltW!o ......... .... ,. •• flt"""" ,., c-...... ~lao\. W.W.,4 or ,-'4 --
1.,_11. ... ,~
Sheet 8 of 17
Schematic Plan • Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
!
2000
6
5
_,/
J __ ,
2 r
I
SC L
FORT WORTH ,· ~50• ...
N A t.:Jo~A}TIE:~
NO , 11(\1.SIOM av DA tE JUNE 2010
II
12
I
1.3 I
=t ==1E=~====UE==NALL======A=N.=D=Pi=E='R;;,;;K;;,IN.;;;;S;::::;
INC .
1100 Macon Str••I
Fo,, Wo,tl't, r ...... :1•10~
1'11•"•:fl 11 l33t • I 11 I • f •~:(I J7JJ J l •~I fl
•••.ttttJ •••ll••·e••
Tilk ._, ill fW toot.,..., , ... a.Cl It "'°'
h1tiftN41 ltt Wl•lt\.letto.. ~.,-,.,,..It -e
,._ It-a , ~
'k..i-dW
CR.\PHIC SCA1.E
Sheet 9 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
NO. RC\4 SIOH QY DAtt
SCA
fORT ;ORT!l 1--•·~~s,,__0
•
OA1£
D ===JEA===G=UE==NALL===A=N,='D~PE;;;;'R~IC.~IN,=S~
I N C
lfOO llf•oo,e Str••'
Fo1f Worlh, T•~•• 1110 2
f it otu :(I '1)1 3. ·•I 1 J • F• •:(It 1}31 I •Z I f J
.,., ... , ••••• ,,,. •• c ••
'k-1 Q liiiiiiiil
CIW'HIC SC"1.£
Sheet 10 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, Texas
USACE Project No S\NF-2010-00470
NO av DA.tc
2 CO IE -----,~
-
I
.·H
I ''? J ,· .
/ •• t ~
SC A
FORT WORTH _,·=~so...._.·
DATE
.AJNE 2010
, I
5
,-. TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS .. ==============
INC.
'100 M"•c-0 11 ~,, •• ,
F o~, w o,,,-. T•••• 7 e to st
t-11 o,u :(I ,11 111 • 111 3 • F•, :(I ,1133 I -~I II ....... ,,. ... ,.,,,. .. , ..
7 8
....... ---....... !
21 20 19 18
\
\ ---t--\------,,,c::_-
IO II U :,A
K-----s;;;.I
"'""'""' SCAI.£ Sheet 11 of 17
Schematic Plan • Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USACE Proj ect No SWF-201 0-00470
MO
-======J'E'A==G=UE=NALL======A=N='D=P.='ER~K~IN~S~
INC.
191"f ........... #o.F--no
1100 Macon .a:tr••t ,.,, w.,,,,, T•11•• r•roa , •• ,,.:,, ,,,,2,.,,,., • , •. :u ,,,.,~,.,, ,.,
... ,,.,,., •• ltlfl'•-~·-
/
,-,, . '
I ' ·,' \
I
I
I
,--... , -, ,.
I A
I '
'/( \
\ ' I \
' I I
I
I •,
,,
/ .
I
I
I
\ w
CRAPHIC SCAl£
---......
-';, , ... , -... _,
Pi• ...-,,.,..1 Ml f• hi.,.,.. ,....,., lflMI !. -.I =·--Uf'ttN~. ~ « .,...,.Jj
,Sheet 12 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort VVorth , Texas
USACE Project No S\NF-2010-00470
RC,.SICIN
,1 00 M•con Stt•••
l'ort W o r th , T•••• 1•102
11'•0" ,:(I ti JJJ l•J 1 fJ ,. F• x :(I 11/ II•• t• t.3
•••·'••••1t ll"•·o••
Sheet 13 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
,,,, :
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I l 1----r--'.------.L....'
I
I
I ,:
I ,,
I
I
I ,,
I
I ,---.J_ --.:.:-,I
ov o"'ri
• I Fl.(J()()P/.AJN j
l' -~ I r ___ !t__ I I\
--
-----.~--[ ... _,,-~
:"-,'=,-•~-~--,,: __ - -
PRrnED }IXJ-'t1?
-ROCIJPWI . "
r-\
GUE NALL AND PERKINS
'100 M•,,on 4t r••t
Fort Worth, T•11•• 1e10~
,.,.., .. :r•11JJ31 .111.1 • ,.,:,, '1'13 ,~,, n .,, ••. ,,,,-•11lt11•.c••
-N >
Sheet 14 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort \North, Texas
USAGE Project No S\NF-2010-00470
NO, 9 Y DA11:
~j<
r PR<Y'OSED 100-YR
✓ FI.O(X)PW/1
INC.
\
~ ~;;.\ ✓-
,;'/;<' '
,,,; --
'100 M•oon .Str•••
Fo,t Worth. T•1t •• 1e102
\
,.,.., .. :(1 ,,,.,, I • 1111 • ,.11 :t• 11 J1 .,, ., I rl
ww ... ,,.~-•nllna .ir••
PROPOst:D 100-
FLOOOPWN
--------·-
-_. 1-----7 ,· -,, \
._ __ ; ', .I ]
:=--=-
-... --
0)1\\tl'I----~----+--
_,,..,,--',,
-~" \\ --. ,,_ \
CFFECTl"f: 100-
. Fl
, ..... ,~
' '
.. • 1ll ..
b-X->--ii\i-1
Q!APH«:>GM.t
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth , Texas
USAGE Project No SWF-2010-00470
--------
---~
7""-,. _ _::-~----::_-r»IT ------~ :t t --:,_-:i;· . :--
1 I
',· ,-J~ I·
...,_
-I .
UENALL
1100 M•oon atre•t
Forl Wortlt . T•.r•• 1•10~
,,. a1u:U '1)33 I -I 113 • T" •:(111) :U I •II rJ
.,., •• ,,.,. •• ,.,, ••. c ••
rY'OS[J)J~
N ------
• • -t::I l"SZ",..l l....,j
Sheet 16 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, Texas
USACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
urrcnvr 100-m
FLO<JOPI.AJN
TEAGUE NALL AND PERKINS
rr oo M•c o " a ,, •• ,
For , W o,,11 . T•..,•• 1,,0~
'"•••:fl '1 1 1 ,f · 1111 • F•x :(I '1'3 31 ·11 U •"••t•1t ·••ll11 •.c••
,~db"
r.RAPHIC $CAL[
Sheet 17 of 17
Schematic Plan -Drainage Improvements
Lebow Channel Watershed City of Fort \North , Texas
USAGE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Bryan W. Shaw, Ph,D ., P.E., Chainna n
Toby Baker, Co m missioner
Jon Nierman n , Commiss ioner
Steph anie Bergeron Perdue, Interim Exec utive Director
TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRO NMENTAL QUALI1Y
Pro t ec ting Texas by Redu cing and Pr eve n ting Pollutio n
May 9, 2018
Mr. Stephen Brooks
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch CESWF-EV-R
P.O. Box 17300
Fort Worth, Texas 76102
Attention: Mr. Neil Lebsock
Re: USACE Permit Application No. SWF-2010-00470
Dear Mr. Brooks:
gfEW5fEDWLEm
MAY 1 4 2018 ~I
By
1bis letter is in response to the Statement of Findings (SOF) dated April 27, 2018, for the
Joint Public Notice dated February 24, 2016. The applicant, City of Fort Worth, is seeking
after-the-fact authorization for prior impacts and authorization for additional impacts
related to the fill and grading of Lebow Channel and associated ephemeral tributaries.
Total impacts to waters of the United States would include unauthorized impacts to 600
linear feet of Lebow Creek (intennittent) in association with the Dewey Street bridge
replacement, and proposed impacts to 17,961 linear feet of Lebow Creek, 938 linear feet of
ephemeral tributaries, and 0.54 acre of forested wetlands for flood control purposes.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has reviewed the public notice
and related application information along with the SOF. On behalf of the Executive
Director and based on our evaluation of the information contained in these documents, the
TCEQ certifies that there is reasonable assurance that the project will be conducted in a
way that will not violate water quality standards. General information regarding this water
quality certification, including standard provisions of the certification, is included as an
attachment to this letter.
To offset unavoidable adverse impacts to waters of the United States, the applicant
proposes to implement on-site pennittee responsible mitigation (PRM) on the Lower Lebow
Channel. The PRM would consist of.an area totaling 8.65 acres along 1 3,511 linear feet of
enhanced tributary channel with micro-floodplains, and 1.12 acres of emergent wetlands
that would include a mixture of native grasses, shrubs, and trees. Additionally, the Upper
Lebow Channel would be mitigated through the purchase of mitigat ion bank credits from
an approved USAC E mitigation bank.
P.O. Box 13 087 • Au s tin, Texas 78711 -3 08 7 • 512-2 39-1000 • tceq.texas .gov
How is our cu stomer service? tceq .texas .gov/customerswvey
print«! on necycl«I P"P'f
Mr. Stephen Brooks
Page 2
May 9, 2018
The applicant would more than likely stagger the purchase of mitigation bank credits as
the project proceeds due to the cost associated with bank credits and timing of impacts.
No review of property rights, location of property lines, nor the distinction between public
and private ownership has been made, and this certification may not be used in any way
with regard to questions of ownership.
If you require additional information or further assistance, please contact Ms. Lili Murphy
of the Water Quality Division MC-150, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, Texas 78711-3087. Ms.
Murphy may also be contacted by e-mail at lili.rnurphy@tceq.texa_s.gov, or by telephone at
(512) 239-4596.
ffi~
David W. Galindo, Director ~
Water Quality Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
DWG/LM/fc
Attachment
cc: Mr. Michael Owen, City of Fort Worth, 1000 Throckmorton Street, Fort Worth, Texas
76102
Mr. Stephen Brooks, Branch Chief
USACE Permit Application Number SWF-2010-00470
Attachment 1 -Dredge and Fill Certification
Page 1 of 3
WORK DESCRIJYTION: As described in the public notice dated February 24, 2016, and the
April 27, 2018, Environmental Assessment and Statement of Findings.
SPECIAL CONDillONS: None
GENERAL: This certification, issued pursuant to the requirements of Title 30, Texas
Administrative Code, Chapter 279, is restricted to the work described in the April 27,
2018, Environmental Assessment and Statement of Findings and shall be concurrent
with the Corps of Engineers (COE) permit. This certification may be extended to any
minor revision of the COE permit when such change(s) would not result in an impact on
water quality. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) reserves the right
to require full joint public notice on a request for minor revision. The applicant is hereby
placed on notice that any activity conducted pursuant to the COE permit which results in a
violation of the state's surface water quality standards may result in an enforcement
proceeding being initiated by the TCEQ or a successor agency.
STANDARD PROVISIONS: These following provisions attach to any permit issued by the
COE and shall be followed by the permittee or any employee, agent, contractor, or
subcontractor of the permittee during any phase of work authorized by a COE permit.
1. The water quality of wetlands shall be maintained in accordance with all applicable
provisions of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards including the General,
Narrative, and Numerical Criteria.
2. The applicant shall not engage in any activity which will cause surface waters to be
toxic to man, aquatic life, or terrestrial life.
3. Permittee shall employ measures to control spills of fuels, lubricants, or any other
materials to prevent them from entering a watercourse. All spills shall be promptly
reported to the TCEQ by calling the State of Texas Environmental Hotline at 1-800-
832-8224.
4. Sanitary wastes shall be retained for disposal in some legal manner. Marinas and
similar operations which harbor boats equipped with marine sanitation devices shall
provide state/federal permitted treatment facilities or pump out facilities for
ultimate transfer to a permitted treatment facility. Additionally, marinas shall
display signs in appropriate locations advising boat owners that the discharge of
sewage from a marine sanitation device to waters in the state is a violation of state
and federal law.
5. Materials resulting from the destruction of existing structures shall be removed from
the water or areas adjacent to the water and disposed of in some legal manner.
Mr. Stephen Brooks, Branch Chief
USACE Permit Application Number SWF-2010-00470
Attachment 1 -Dredge and Fill Certification
Page 2 of 3
6. A discharge shall not cause substantial and persistent changes from ambient
conditions of turbidity or color. The use of silt screens or other appropriate
methods is encouraged to confine suspended particul ates.
7. The placement of any material in a watercourse or wetlands shall be avoided and
placed there only with the approval of the Corps whe n no other reasonable
alternative is available. If work within a wetland is unavoidable, gouging or rutting of
the substrate is prohibited. Heavy equipment shall be placed on mats to protect the
substrate from gouging and rutting if necessary.
8. Dredged Material Placement: Dredged sediments shall be placed in such a manner as
to prevent any sediment runoff onto any adjacent pro erty not owned by the
applicant. Liquid runoff from the disposal area shall be retained on-site or shall be
filtered and returned to the watercourse from which the dredged materials were
removed. Except for material placement authorized by this permit, sediments from
the project shall be placed in such a manner as to prevent any sediment runoff into
waters in the state, including wetlands.
9. If contaminated spoil that was not anticipated or provided for in the permit
application is encountered during dredging, dredging operations shall be
immediately terminated and the TCEQ shall be contact ed by calling the State of
Texas Environmental Hotline at 1-800-832-8224. Dre dging activities shall not be
resumed until authorized by the Commission .
10. Contaminated water, soil, or any other material shall not be allowed to enter a
watercourse. Noncontaminated storm water from impervious surfaces shali be
controlled to prevent the washing of debris into the waterway.
11. Storm water runoff from construction activities that result in a disturbance of one or
more acres, or are a part of a common plan of development that will result in the
disturbance of one or more acres, must be controlled and authorized under Texas
Polluta11t Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) general permit TXR150000. A copy
of the general permit, application (notice of intent), and additional information is
available at http://www.tceq.state .tx.us /nav /permits/wq_construction.html or by
contacting the TCEQ Storm Water & Pretreatment Team at (512) 239-4671.
12. Upon completion of earthwork operations, all temporary fills shall be removed from
the watercourse /wetland, and areas disturbed during construction shall be seeded,
riprapped, or given some other type of protection to minimize subsequent soil
erosion. Any fill material shall be clean and of such composition that it will not
adversely affect the biological, chemical, or physical properties of the receiving
waters.
.... '
..
Mr. Stephen Brooks, Branch Chief
USACE Permit Application Number SWF-2010-00470
Attachment 1 -Dredge and Fill Certification
Page 3 of 3
13. Disturbance to vegetation will be limited to only what is absolutely necessary. After
construction, all disturbed areas will be revegetated to approximate the pre-
disturbance native plant assemblage.
14. Where the control of weeds, insects, and other und.esirable species is deemed
necessary by the permittee, control methods which are nontoxic to aquatic life or
human health shall be employed when the activity is located in or in close proximity
to water, including wetlands.
15. Concentrations of taste and odor producing substances shall not interfere with the
production of potable water by reasonable water treatment methods, impart
unpalatable flavor to food fish including shellfish, result in offensive odors arising
from the water, or otherwise interfere with reasonable use of the water in the state.
16. Surface water shall be essentially free of floating debris and suspended solids that
are conducive to producing adverse responses in aquatic organisms, putrescible
sludge deposits, or sediment layers which adversely affect benthic biota or any
lawful uses.
17. Surface waters shall be essentially free of settleable solids conducive to changes in
flow characteristics of stream channels or the untimely filling of reservoirs, lakes,
and bays.
18. The work of the applicant shall be conducted such that surface waters are
maintained in an aesthetically attractive condition and foaming or frothing of a
persistent nature is avoided. Surface waters shall be maintained so that oil, grease,
or related residue will not produce a visible film of oil or globules of grease on the
surface or coat the banks or bottoms of the watercourse.
19. This certification shall not be deemed as fulfilling the applicant's/permittee's
responsibility to obtain additional authorization/approval from other local, state, or
federal regulatory agencies having special/specific authority to preserve and/or
protect resources within the area where the work will occur.
Part I: Project Information
Box 1 Project Name:
Applicant Name
Lebow Channel
Michael Owen PE
Applicant Title
Applicant Company, Agency, etc.
Senior Professional Engineer
City of Fort Worth
Mailing Address
Applicant's internal tracking number (if any)
Transportation and Public Works
1000 Throckmorton Street
Fort Worth, TX 76102
Work Phone with area
Home Phone wicn
Fax #
E-mail Address
code
area code
michael.owen@fortworthtexas.gov
817-392-8079
Relationship of applicant to property:
® Owner ❑ Purchaser ❑ Lessee ❑ Other:
Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work as described herein. I certify that I am
familiar with the information contained in this application, and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, such
information is true, complete, and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the
proposed activities. I hereby grant to the agency to which this application is made the right to enter the
above -described location to inspect the proposed, in -progress, or completed work. I agree to start work only
after all necessary permits have been received.
Signature of applicant
Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
Box 2 Authorized Agent/Operator Name and Signature: (if an agent is acting for the applicant
during the permit process)
Rudi Reinecke
Agent/Operator Title
Agent/Operator Company, Agency, etc.
Wetland Biologist
Integrated Environmental Solutions, LLC
Mailing Address
610 Elm Street, Suite 300, McKinney, TX 75069
E-mail Address
rreinecke@intenvsol.com
Work Phone with area code
Home Phone with area code
Fax #
Cell Phone #
972-562-7672
I hereby authorize the above -named agent to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish,
upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application. I understand that I am bound by the actions of
my agent, and I understand that if a federal or state permit is issued I or my agent, must si n the permit.
Signature of applicant
Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
02 19
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application, and that to the best of my
knowledge and belief, such information is true complete, and accurate.
Signature a th ryy'zed agent
Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
Box 3 Name of property owner, if other than applicant:
® Multiple Current Owners air multiple currentproperty owners, checkhere andinclude a list in AttachmentA)
Owner Title I Owner Company, Agency, etc.
Page 2 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Page 3 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Full Mailing Address
Work Phone with area code
Home Phone with area code
Box 4 Name of adjoining property owner, lessee, etc. whose property adjoins the
project site:
Multiple Adjoining Property Owners/Lessees and Full Mailing Addresses (If multiple adjoining
property owners/lessees, check here and include a list in Attachment B)
Name and Full Mailing Address:
Box 5 Project location, including street address, city, county, state, and zip code
where proposed activity will occur:
The project is located in the City of Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas, beginning at DeRidder
Avenue and continuing south along Lebow Channel, finishing approximately 1,000 feet south
of Brennan Avenue.
Nature of Activity (Description of project; include all features; see instructions):
For the purpose of this project, Lebow Channel has been divided into two sections, Upper and
Lower Lebow. The sections will be further divided into segments for implementing
construction. The improvements associated with Lower Lebow favor more natural and earthen
improvements, while Upper Lebow favors more traditional channel widening and structural
improvements.
Lower Lebow Channel Improvements
In general, the Lower Lebow Channel improvements favor restoration of a more natural
floodplain due to the reduced density of structures. These improvements will include wider
benched areas, flatter banks, and more meander of the corridor. The channel improvements
will consist of expanding channel capacity by excavating a 30- to 50-foot earthen channel with
50 to 75-foot wide banks and a low-flow channel in the bottom. Additionally, there will be two
bypass/overflow channels constructed to aid in reducing the floodplain. Several drop structures
have been proposed to reduce the flowline slope, which will maintain channel capacity and
reduce velocities. After construction, native trees and grasses will be planted along the stream
bank.
Upper Lebow Channel Improvements
The Upper Lebow Channel consists of a higher density residential lots than the Lower Lebow
Channel. Substantial structural improvements and additional channel capacity are required to
reduce the flood risk to these structures. The proposed channel consists of hard armoring
along the streambanks and a widened, lowered, natural channel bottom averaging 40-feet
wide. This section will also include a stormwater detention facility north of Long Avenue, with
the capacity to offset the loss of valley storage associated with the proposed upstream
improvements.
Page 4 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Project Purpose (Description of the reason or purpose of the project; see instructions):
Lebow Channel is the main drainage feature throughout this sub-watershed basin that conveys
a significant amount of water during larger storm events. However, this channel does not
convey the 100-year storm event within the channel; thereby resulting in a larger floodplain,
up to 1400 feet wide, through this urban area. Many residences and commercial structures
become inundated during these larger storm events. Significant flood hazards that have
occurred along Lower Lebow include inundated creek crossings, inundation of Decatur Avenue
(as well as other streets), flooded structures, and the loss of life on two occasions. The City of
Fort Worth would like to use this channel enhancement project to reduce the floodplain in the
highly urbanized segments of the channel; thereby, reducing flooding of roads, property
damage, and reducing the safety issues that have occurred during flooding, while enhancing
the environmental benefits within the less urbanized segment.
Has a delineation of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, been completed? (see instructions)
Yes, in Attachment C No
If a delineation has been completed, has it been verified in writing by the USACE?
Yes, Date of approved or preliminary jurisdictional determination (mm/dd/yyyy):
USACE project:
No
Are color photographs of the existing conditions available? Yes, in Attachment D No
Are aerial photographs available? Yes, in Attachment D No
Complete the table in Attachment E for any waters of the U.S. impacted by the
proposed project.
Waterbody(ies) (if known; otherwise enter “an unnamed tributary to”): Lebow
Tributary(ies) to what known, downstream waterbody(ies): West Fork Trinity River
Latitude and longitude (Decimal Degrees at center of project):
32.8050 and -97.3301
USGS Quad map name(s):
Haltom City
Watershed(s) and other location descriptions, if known:
Lower West Fork Trinity watershed, Lebow Channel is also called WF-4A by FEMA.
Directions to the project location:
From Interstate 35W, exit Long Avenue. Head west on Long Avenue. Head north on Decatur
Avenue. Go northwest on Elaine Street. Head west on De Ridder Avenue. The project begins
where Lebow channel flows under De Ridder Avenue (approximately 200 feet from the
intersection of De Ridder Avenue and Elaine Street.
Part II: Alternative(s) Analysis
Box 6 Describe the alternatives that would meet your overall project purpose in
accordance with the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) guidelines to demonstrate
the proposed activity represents the least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative: (See instructions)
Alternative(s) Analysis in Attachment F
Page 5 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Part III: Project Impacts and Mitigation
Box 7 Reason(s) for Discharge into waters of the U.S. (See instructions):
Material will be discharged into Lebow Channel to reduce flooding and improve the quality of
the channel. Hard armoring solution will be placed in the channel at discrete locations for
drop structures to reduce velocities in the channel. Tributary 2 and Wetland 1 will be graded
to create a detention area for Upper Lebow.
Type(s) of material being discharged and the amount of each type in cubic yards:
Hard armoring solution will be dischaged. There will be 6,566 cubic yards.
Total surface area (in acres) of wetlands or other waters of the U.S. to be filled:
3.96 acres
For activities involving dredging in navigable waters of the U.S., describe the type,
composition, and quantity of the material to be dredged, the method of dredging, and the site
and plans for disposal of the dredged material:
Indicate the proposed impacts to waters of the U.S. in ACRES (for wetlands and impoundments) and LINEAR
FEET (for rivers and streams), and identify the impact(s) as permanent and/or temporary for each waterbody
type listed below. The table below is intended as a tool to summarize impacts by resource type for planning
compensatory mitigation and does not replace the table of waters of the U.S. in Attachment E.
Permanent Temporary
Waterbody Type Acres Linear feet Acres Linear feet
Non-forested wetland
Forested wetland 0.54 na
Perennial stream
Intermitten stream 3.37 13,313
Ephemeral stream 0.06 684
Impoundment
Other:
Total: 3.97 13,997
Page 6 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Potential indirect and/or cumulative impacts of proposed discharge (if any):
This project would result in cumulative beneficial effects for environmental conditions of the
Lebow Channel drainage area (e.g., wildlife habitat); the adjacent properties, structures and
roadways; and for water quality for the West Fork Trinity River watershed. Proposed activities
would be phased over a multi-year period to provide overall benefits with each contract let by
the City of Fort Worth for completion of one or more segments of the drainage project. The
priority goal of this project is to remove structures and roadways from inundation during high
flow events within the Lebow Channel with secondary benefits accumulating from increased
water quality and more high quality open space. This reduction of inundation creates a safer
and healthier environment for this part of the City of Fort Worth by reducing the potential for
public health hazards associated with flooded homes and businesses and the potential for loss
of life associated with flooded roadways. The City of Fort Worth has undertaken this master
planning approach to ensure that benefits accrue to the citizens of Fort Worth that live within
the immediate vicinity and those residents and visitors to the expanded Trinty River greenbelt
on multiple levels from public health and safety through the reduction of flooding to increased
quality of life through more acreages of parks, trails, and outdoor recreational areas.
Required drawings (see instructions):
Vicinity map: In Attachment G
To-scale plan view drawing(s): In Attachment G
To-scale elevation and/or cross section drawing(s): In Attachment G
Is any portion of the work already complete? Yes No
If yes, describe the work: Two bridge replacements, being considered as part of the
cumulative project and overall existing length of Lebow Channel, have been completed prior to
this application, both under Nationwide Permit 14. The SH 183 bridge (28 th Street) at Decatur
Avenue was replaced as part of the Texas Department of Transportion (TxDOT) Fort Worth
District project with Categorical Exclusion approved in September 2008. The Dewey Street
bridge at Decatur Avenue has been replaced as a City of Fort Worth roadway improvement
project.
Box 8 Authority: (see instructions)
Is Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act for projects affecting navigable waters applicable?
Yes No (see Fort Worth District Navigable Waters list)
Is Section 404 of the Clean Water Act applicable? Yes No
Page 7 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Box 9 Federally Threatened or Endangered Species (see instructions)
Please list any federally-listed (or proposed) threatened or endangered species or critical habitat
potentially affected by the project (use scientific names (i.e., genus species), if known):
According to the USFWS, four species, Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus), Least Tern (Sterna
antillarum athalassos), Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa), and Whooping Crane (Grus
americana) are listed as Federally protected (i.e., threatened or endangered) with the
potential to occur within Tarrant County. No Federally listed critical habitat for these species is
located within Tarrant County within the vicinity of the project site. Two of the species listed
as threatened within Tarrant County, the Red Knot and the Piping Plover, are conditionally
listed as threatened on the basis that the proposed development is for wind energy
production. Review of the TXNDD files did not indicate any known occurrences of protected
species, unique vegetation communities, parks, or natural/managed areas within the project
site.
In regards to Federally-listed threatened and endangered species, the Red Knot, Piping Plover,
Whooping Crane, and Least Tern were the only species listed for Tarrant County. Neither the
riparian corridor or grassland communities provide suitable for any of the Federally-listed
species. These habitats were also not suitable for nesting, feeding, or stopover migration
habitat for these species. Furthermore, as the project site is within a highly urbanized area,
making the habitat less preferrable.
Have surveys, using U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) protocols, been conducted?
Yes, Report in Attachment H No (explain): Although the survey was designed to
identify preferred habitats of listed species, and not to perform species-specific surveys, no
protected species were identified within the project site during investigations. As such, it is
highly unlikely that listed species previously and/or currently utilize the project site. Therefore,
it is unlikely that the proposed project will have any adverse effect on state - and/or federally
listed threatened or endangered species. The habitats identified within the project site do not
match the preferred habitat descriptions described for any protected species listed in Tarrant
County. As such, it is IES’ professional opinion that the proposed project will not disturb
habitat necessary for the lifecycle of any protected species listed in Tarrant County.
If a federally-listed species would potentially be affected, please provide a description and a
biological evaluation.
Yes, Report in Attachment H Not attached
Has Section 7 consultation been initiated by another federal agency?
Yes, Initiation letter in Attachment H No
Has Section 10 consultation been initiated for the proposed project?
Yes, Initiation letter in Attachment H No
Has the USFWS issued a Biological Opinion?
Yes, Report in Attachment H No
If yes, list date Opinion was issued (mm/dd/yyyy):
Box 10 Historic Properties and Cultural Resources
Please list any historic properties listed (or eligible to be listed) on the National Register of Historic
Places which the project has the potential to affect:
None
Has an archaeological records search been conducted?
Yes, Report in Attachment I No (explain): During a pre-application meeting for this
Section 404 permit, the USACE cultural resources specialist conducted a preliminary analysis to
determine whether a survey was warranted due to the urban nature of the area. The USACE
Page 8 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
identified concerns regarding the potential age of the structures that are being removed and
whether they could be eligible. Additionally, the USACE identified that there is a higher potential
of archeological sites located in the floodplain south of 28th Street. The USACE determined that a
survey should be conducted to ensure compliance with the state and Federal requirements and
approval for the Section 404 permit. An Antiquities Permit Application was sent to the Texas
Historical Commission A Phase I intensive cultural resources (archaeological and historical)
survey will be preformed within the proposed project area including a full pedestrian survey to
document sites or features and historic buildings, bridges, or other structures older than 50 years
of age. Results of this survey will be provided under a separate deliverable.
Are any cultural resources of any type known to exist on-site?
Yes No
Has an archaeological pedestrian survey been conducted for the site?
Yes, Report in Attachment I No (explain):
Has Section 106 or SHPO consultation been initiated by another federal or state agency?
Yes, Initiation letter in Attachment I No
Has a Section 106 MOA been signed by another federal agency and the SHPO?
Yes, in Attachment I No
If yes, list date MOA was signed (mm/dd/yyyy):
Box 11 Proposed Conceptual Mitigation Plan Summary (see instructions)
Applicant proposes combination of one or more of the following mitigation types:
Mitigation Bank On-site Off-site (Number of sites: ) None
Applicant proposes to purchase mitigation bank credits: Yes No
Mitigation Bank Name:
Number of Credits:
Indicate in ACRES (for wetlands and impoundments) and LINEAR FEET (for rivers and streams) the total quantity
of waters of the U.S. proposed to be created, restored, enhanced, and/or preserved for purposes of providing
compensatory mitigation. Indicate mitigation site type (on- or off-site) and number. Indicate waterbody type
(non-forested wetland, forested wetland, perennial stream, intermittent stream, ephemeral stream,
impoundment, other) or non-jurisdictional (uplands1).
Mitigation
Site Type and
Number
Waterbody Type Created Restored Enhanced Preserved
e.g., On-site 1 Non-forested wetland 0.5 acre
e.g., Off-site 1 Intermittent stream 500 LF 1000 LF
On-site Intermittent stream na 13,511 LF
On-site Ephemeral stream na 627 LF
On-site Non-forested wetland 1.12 acres
Tota s: 1.12 acres 14,138 LF
1 For uplands, please indicate if designed as an upland buffer.
Summary of Mitigation Work Plan (Describe the mitigation activities listed in the table above):
See Mitigation Plan in Attachment J for mitigation activities by segment.
Page 9 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Provide a detailed explanation of how appropriate and practicable steps have been taken to
avoid, minimize, or mitigate, the adverse impact of the proposed project on the aquatic
ecosystem:
The project is not only designed to reduce flooding but also to increase the environmental
benefit of the channel. The goal will be to have only net positive or neutral impacts to the
aquatic ecosystem. See the mitigation plan for specific project details.
Has a conceptual mitigation plan been prepared in accordance with the USACE regulations and
guidelines? Yes, in Attachment J No (explain):
Mitigation site(s) latitude and longitude (Decimal
Degrees at center of site): 32.8050 and -97.3301
USGS Quad map name(s):
Haltom City
Other location descriptions, if known:
NA
Directions to the mitigation location(s):
From Interstate 35W, exit 28th Street. Head west on 28th street. The mitigation area is
located north and south of 28th Street, approximately 0 .5 miles west of Interstate 35W. The
mitigation area extends from Long Avenue downstream of Lebow Channel to 1,000 feet south
of Brennan Avenue.
Box 12 Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification (see instructions):
For Texas:
TCEQ Type of 401 Certification: Tier I Tier II
For Tier I, does the project incorporate the Best Management Practices (BMPs) and other
requirements of the Tier I Checklist?
Yes (Include Completed Tier I Checklist in Attachment K) No
For Tier II, has a 401 Certification Questionnaire and Alternatives Analysis Checklist been
completed? Yes, in Attachment K No
For Louisiana:
Applying for individual water quality certification? Yes No
Other information for individual water quality certification:
Box 13 List of other certifications or approvals/denials received from other
federal, state, or local agencies for work described in this application:
Agen y Approval
Type2
Id nt fication
No. Date Applied Date
Approved Da e Denied
FEMA
2 Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and floodplain permits
Page 10 of 10 SWF Recommended IP Application Form
Part IV: Attachments
Included
A. List of Project Site Property Owners
B. List of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, etc.
C. Delineation of Waters of the U.S., Including Wetlands
D. Color Photographs
E. Table of Waters of the U.S. Impacted by the Proposed Project
F. Alternative(s) Analysis
G. Required Drawings/Figures
H. Federally Threatened or Endangered Species Information
I. Historic Properties and Cultural Resources Information
J. Conceptual Mitigation Plan
K. Section 401 Water Quality Certification Information
L. Other:
End of Form
ATTACHMENT A LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS
CITY OF FORT WORTH
1000 THROCKMORTON ST
FORT WORTH, TX 76102-6311
REGIONAL RAIL ROW CO
ATTN: DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT
PO BOX 660163
DALLAS, TX 75266-0163
FAA DEVELOPMENT LLC
501 ROGERS RD
BENBROOK, TX 76126
LMP REALTY ONC
820 LINCOLN AVE
WEST CHESTER PA 19380-4406
FORT WORTH ISD
100 N UNIVERSITY DR
FORT WORTH TX 76107-1360
U S LIME COMPANY
Attention: TAX DEPT
5429 LBJ FWY STE 230
DALLAS TX 75240
J & D RELIABLE TRUCKING INC
Attention: PO BOX 851481
MESQUITE TX 75185-1481
SPENCER HODGE
ATTN: 5021 LAKEVIEW CIR
FORT WORTH, TX 76180
FOUNDATION DRILLERS INC
ATTN: TAX DEPT
5021 LAKEVIEW CIR
FORT WORTH, TX 76180-7809
D & D PALLETS INC
Attention: ATTN: TAX DEPT
PO BOX 667
FORT WORTH TX 76101-0667
STANDISH CHRISTIAN MILES
2416 ROBERTS CIR
ARLINGTON, TX 76010
DEEN FT WORTH ASSOC LP
ATTN: % NUROCK PROPERTIES
800 NORTH POINT PKWY #125
ALPHARETTA, GA 30005-4124
BARRIENTOS MARIA
4028 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH, TX 76106-4045
ORMSBEE MINNIE KATHERINE
7290 JAY LN
AZLE, TX 76020-5742
DICKERSON NORMA R
4020 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
CORDRY JACK D
4000 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH, TX 76106-4045
AVILES JUVENTINO
1208 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH, TX 76106-2935
ENRIQUEZ ANTONIO DORANTES
1212 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH, TX 76106-2935
SMITH PAUL LAYNE
1500 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH, TX 76106-3012
WESTCREST PARTNERS LLC
2808 BROOKSHIRE DR
SOUTHLAKE, TX 76092-8933
RIVERA MANUEL
3425 LOCKE AVE
FORT WORTH, TX 76107-5704
STEELE JAMES B
2517 LUBBOCK AVE
FORT WORTH, TX 76109-1447
BOLES ADAM WILLIAM
2308 ROBERTS CIR
ARLINGTON, TX 76010-2217
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RR CO
ATTN: % PROPERTY TAX DEPT
PO BOX 961089
FORT WORTH, TX 76161-0089
ATTACHMENT B LIST OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS
IVAN MARTINEZ
2004 E LONG AVE
FORT WORTH, 76106
BONIFACIO MARTINEZ
2002 E LONG AVE
FORT WORTH, 76106
GUNAWARDANE ANURADHA SAHAN
PO BOX 372
HURST TX 76053-0372
CITY OF FORT WORTH
1000 THROCKMORTON ST
FORT WORTH, TX 76102-6311
UNION PACIFIC RR CO
1400 DOUGLAS STOP 1640 ST
OMAHA, NE 68179
U S LIME COMPANY
Attention: TAX DEPT
5429 LBJ FWY STE 230
DALLAS TX 75240
J & D RELIABLE TRUCKING INC
Attention: PO BOX 851481
MESQUITE TX 75185-1481
SPENCER HODGE
ATTN: 5021 LAKEVIEW CIR
FORT WORTH, TX 76180
FOUNDATION DRILLERS INC
ATTN: TAX DEPT
5021 LAKEVIEW CIR
FORT WORTH, TX 76180-7809
RAMIREZ ROBERTO
3051 SCHADT ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-6218
D & D PALLETS INC
Attention: ATTN: TAX DEPT
PO BOX 667
FORT WORTH TX 76101-0667
BROWNE WILLIAM V
3252 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-6325
SANCHEZ SEFERINO
2560 PEAK ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-7323
ARCOS JUAN
3506 ELLIS AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4307
WHITE BETTY SUE
2556 PEAK ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-7323
ALEXANDER STEPHEN C
1701 BRENNAN AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-8315
A & S FAB INC
Attention: ATTN: TAX DEPT
1701 BRENNAN AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-8315
HERNANDEZ NATALI
3753 NECHES ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4028
LITTLE ROBERT GORDON
2902 SCHADT ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-7333
NIRVANA RETIREMENT FUND-II LLC
2808 BROOKSHIRE DR
SOUTHLAKE TX 76092-8933
TIJERINA CONNIE
2614 DECATUR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-7215
MCCALIN EUGENE W
7504 CADDO CT
FORT WORTH TX 76132-3534
SUAREZ JESSIE S
3206 SCHWARTZ AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-6339
STANDISH CHRISTIAN MILES
2416 ROBERTS CIR
ARLINGTON TX 76010
GARCIA ESTELA
3200 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-6323
STEWART KENNETH
3160 SCHWARTZ AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-6337
CHANCE HOUSING MANAGEMENT
INC
PO BOX 185033
FORT WORTH TX 76181-0052
LUNA MARY G
3308 HUTCHINSON ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-6315
GARCIA OSCAR
GARCIA ILDA G
4625 SAINT THOMAS PL
FORT WORTH TX 76135-1653
JAROCKI IRMA
3719 N NICHOLS ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3812
CANALES JOSE
4113 SCHADT CT
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3035
TEMPL BEREA ASAM DE DIOS
Attention: AKA COMMUN
CRISTIANA BER FTW
1824 TERMINAL RD
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4056
SALAZAR DICK
SALAZAR ANITA
2004 NE 36TH ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4641
TORRES SANTIAGO CORTES
2200 NE 36TH ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4718
CARRILLO ELIGIO
CARRILLO MARIA
3762 GROVER AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4009
DEEN FT WORTH ASSOC LP
Attention: % NUROCK PROPERTIES
800 NORTH POINT PKWY # 125
ALPHARETTA GA 30005-4124
NIETO PETE CEDILLO
3740 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4037
SALAS JUAN
3736 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4037
RODRIGUEZ JUAN
3745 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH, TX 76106-4016
PEREZ OSCAR M
8216 N WATER TOWER RD
SAGINAW TX 76179-5168
ACEVEDO PEDRO A
ACEVEDO ISAURA
4816 HOPE ST
FORT WORTH TX 76114-2950
VAZQUEZ SERGIO
VAZQUEZ LISANDRA
3737 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4016
HERNANDEZ ISIDRO L
3728 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4037
MARTINEZ RICARDO
MARTINEZ NORMA
3733 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4016
MUNOZ SEBASTIAN
3725 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4038
PERALES BILLY JOE
913 COMMONWEALTH CT
FORT WORTH TX 76179-0801
ALMANZA MIGUEL
3720 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4037
LARUE MATTIE SUE
3725 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4016
CASA UNLIMITED ENTERPRISES LP
PO BOX 8008
FORT WORTH TX 76124-0008
RODELA GEORGE D EST SR
4809 PALM RIDGE DR
FORT WORTH TX 76133-8319
GARCIA NOE
3712 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4037
GONZALEZ RAFAEL
GONZALEZ MONICA
1508 JASPER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3918
OLMOS HERMELINDA F ETAL
3708 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4037
WESTMORELAND ELLEN K EST
3011 SCHWARTZ AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-6332
CONTRERAS JOSE
2007 NE 36TH ST
FORT WORTH 76106-4642
RICO CLEMENCIO
RICO ZOREIDA
3900 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4043
OCHOA CARLOS
3901 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4022
SEGOVIANO RAYMOND JR
908 WRIGLEY WAY
SAGINAW TX 76179-0912
CASTANEDA TIOFILO
CASTANEDA H
PO BOX 4126
FORT WORTH TX 76164-0126
SEGOVIANO SARA
3866 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH, 76106-4041
RIYANTO JOKO P
RIYANTO BLANCA A
5203 VICKSBURG DR
ARLINGTON TX 76017-4941
MUNOZ SEGUNDO
MUNOZ CONSUELO
3862 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4041
DELAPAZ TOMAS
DELAPAZ MARIA
3859 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4020
OLMOS FROYLAN
OLMOS ARCELIA
3858 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4041
CARRASCO MARIO
CARRASCO HORTENSIA
3855 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4020
VALADEZ ALBERT
VALADEZ ALEJANDRA
3854 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4041
PRIETO MIGUEL JR
3851 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4020
DAVILA SALVADOR
3850 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4041
FRAZIER MARIA M
1425 DEER CHASE DR
NORMAN OK 73071-3934
AYALA DANIEL EST SR
AYALA FRAN
Attention: ATTN: DORA KING
3816 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4039
AGUILER ERNESTO C
AGUILER RAMONA
3928 HEMLOCK ST
FORT WORTH TX 76137-1611
GUTIERREZ ALBERTO
3812 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4039
LADINOS LEONARDO
LADINOS MARIA
4036 WEBER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3936
GUTIERREZ ALBERTO
GUTIERREZ YOLANDA
3808 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4039
LADINOS LEONARDO
LADINOS MARIA
3805 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4018
ANGUIANO GILBERT
3804 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4039
MONTANEZ ERNESTO
MONTANEZ MARIA
3801 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4018
ANGUIANO RAMON
5864 PEARL OYSTER LN
FORT WORTH TX 76179-7562
LOPEZ MARIA CONSUELO
3753 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4016
CASTANEDA TEOFILO
CASTANEDA HERMEL
618 HARRISDALE AVE
RIVER OAKS TX 76114-3721
AVILA MARISELA L
AVILA RAUL
3749 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4016
IGLESIA NUEVA VIDA CHURCH
1800 TERMINAL RD
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4056
JAIMES LUCIANO
JAIMES ROSARIO
2805 NW 30TH ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-5238
POWELL LEONA
4032 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
MUNOZ SEGUNDO
4037 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH, TX 76106-4024
AGUAYO RAMIRO
1666 ROBINWOOD DR
FORT WORTH TX 76111-4956
BARRIENTOS MARIA
BARRIENTOS J M URBINA
4028 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
KIDWILL KEITH A
PO BOX 4491
FORT WORTH TX 76164-0491
ORMSBEE MINNIE KATHERINE
7290 JAY LN
AZLE TX 76020-5742
SOSA HENRY
4025 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4024
DICKERSON NORMA R
4020 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
SOSA HENRY
4021 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4024
GALLEGOS GERARDO E
GALLEGOS NORMA
4016 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
MUNOZ BALTAZAR
3871 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4042
NINO CRISPIN V
2328 BROTHERS ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4104
SAMUELS DERRICK
SAMUELS ENGLAND
2618 MORGAN ANN AVE
MANSFIELD TX 76063-3728
PADILLA JUAN JOSE
1013 SILVER SPUR LN
FORT WORTH TX 76179-2330
LUNA DANIEL
4009 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4024
CORDOVA DOLORES
4004 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
CASTILLO SAMUEL
4005 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4024
CORDRY JACK D
CORDRY ERNEST C ETAL
4000 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
CORDRY ROBERT LEE
4000 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4045
AVINA HORTENSIA M ETAL
4001 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4024
PETERKA WILLIE L
3916 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4043
BATES NANETTE
3917 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4022
HERNANDEZ JULIO ROBERTO
3913 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4022
BEDOLLA LORENA
4124 47TH AVE
VERO BEACH FL 32967-1664
CORTEZ ISIDRO
CORTEZ CARMELA
3909 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4022
GARCIA RAMIRO
5412 STONE MEADOW LN
FORT WORTH TX 76179-4285
RAMOS MARY ELSA
3904 OSCAR AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4043
VERONA VICTOR M
VERONA M TORRES
3905 LEBOW ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4022
FORT WORTH CITY OF
Attention: PARKS & COMMUNITY
SVCS DEPT
1000 THROCKMORTON ST
FORT WORTH TX 76102-6311
SALDIVAR ANGEL
SALDIVAR MARIA C
1105 DE RIDDER AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2928
RIOS LUIS
1204 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
AVILES JUVENTINO
1208 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
ENRIQUEZ ANTONIO DORANTES
1212 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
ELKINS TIMOTHY D
1216 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
ACOSTA MIGUEL ANGEL
1220 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
GOCHI RUBY
1113 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2908
GARCIA LOURDES
1224 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
MORIN JESUS
MORIN MARIA C
1117 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2908
ZUNIGA GERARDO
1228 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
SCHRADER ROBERT A
1121 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2908
MUNOZ INOCENCIO
MUNOZ MARIA ETAL
1232 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2935
PINEDA JEIDY S
PINEDA VICTOR H
1201 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2910
FLORES MARIO
FLORES REBECCA
1304 DE RIDDER AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2931
PADILLA ALBERTO
PADILLA DIANA
1205 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2910
PADILLA MARIA C
1209 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2910
SITAL FRANCISCA
1300 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2937
NAVA WENCESLAO J
1213 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2910
AREDONDO GREGORIO
AREDONDO MARIA
1304 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2937
PACHECANO PRECILIANO
1217 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2910
PALMER GAYLEEN BROOKS
1308 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2937
DOAN KENNY
DOAN TIFFANY
1221 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2910
MARTINEZ ANTONIO
5921 BOWLING DR
WATAUGA TX 76148-3503
MIRANDA JENNIFER
1717 NE 37TH ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3957
MORALES FELIPE
1316 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2937
BERNAL ELIZABETH C
1305 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2912
SUAREZ JOSEFINA
3315 N HAMPTON ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106
CANTU HERMELINDA G TR
Attention: CANTU FAMILY TRUST
1309 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2912
NAVA WENCESLAO
400 HIGH DESERT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76131-4541
VILLEGAS BELEM
1313 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2912
RIOS RAMONA
RIOS JOSE
14009 NORTHWEST CT
HASLET TX 76052-2672
RODRIGUEZ MARTIN
RODRIGUEZ MARIA O
1412 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2939
NAVA TEODORO
1401 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2914
TRUJILLO DANIEL
TRUJILLO IRMA
1416 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2939
MARTINEZ LUIS EDUARDO
1405 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2914
SOTO AMBROCIO
SOTO CECILIA
1409 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2914
SMITH PAUL LAYNE
1500 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3012
SAMBRANO ERNESTINA
1413 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2914
SAMBRANO MANUELA
1413 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2914
IBARRA ELIYA
4308 STROHL ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106
ESPINOSA ALVINA R
1417 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2914
BUGH MARY B
1508 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106
MENDIOLA JUANITA
1512 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3012
GUERRERO HERNANDO
GUERRERO MARTINA
2353 JASPER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-4117
MEYER WILLIAM R
1600 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3003
MUNOZ ARMANDO
MUNOZ MARICELA
732 MALLARD DR
SAGINAW TX 76131-8804
AVELAR BENJAMIN C
1608 ELAINE PL
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3003
HENSON JOHN DAVID
HENSON ANDREA
4112 SCHADT CT
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3035
MARQUEZ JESUS
MARQUEZ TOMASA R
4113 WEBER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3000
GONZALES JOE A
4112 WEBER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3011
BOILEAU VERNON C
4108 SCHADT CT
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3035
ESPINDOLA MARIA
4109 WEBER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3000
AGUAYO NATIVIDAD
AGUAYO MARGARITA
4108 WEBER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3011
GARZA RALPH
1609 TERMINAL RD
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3946
OLMOS JUAN RAMON
1613 TERMINAL RD
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3946
PENA CARLOS
PENA LUPE
4105 WEBER ST
FORT WORTH TX 76106-3007
PONDT DANA LAVON
11 HEMINGSFORD CT
ARLINGTON TX 76016-4031
WESTCREST PARTNERS LLC
2808 BROOKSHIRE DR
SOUTHLAKE TX 76092-8933
OROPEZA EVARISTO
1109 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2908
MARTINEZ MARIA ODILIA
1105 ALTAMONT DR
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2908
GALLARDO LEOBARDO
1104 DE RIDDER AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76106-2927
MARQUES ARTHUR J
7901 LUCIAN DR
NORTH RICHLAND HILLS TX 76182-
6061
RIVERA MANUEL
3425 LOCKE AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76107-5704
STEELE JAMES B
STEELE ANGELA D
2517 LUBBOCK AVE
FORT WORTH TX 76109-1447
FULLER SANDRA
1549 MONTCLAIR DR
FORT WORTH TX 76103-1811
BOLES ADAM WILLIAM
2308 ROBERTS CIR
ARLINGTON TX 76010-2217
CHESAPEAKE LAND DEV CO LLC
6100 N WESTERN AVE
OKLAHOMA CITY OK 73118-1044
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RR CO
Attention: % PROPERTY TAX DEPT
PO BOX 961089
FORT WORTH TX 76161-0089
ATTACHMENT C DELINEATION REPORT
ATTACHMENT C DELINEATION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Page 1 of 5
SWF-2010-00470
Integrated Environmental Solutions, LLC (IES) performed a survey for potential waters of the United States on the
proposed project corridor starting at DeRidder Avenue in the City of Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas (the
“project site”) (Attachment C-1, Figure 1). This delineation was conducted to ensure compliance with Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for the proposed development planning.
METHODOLOGY
Prior to conducting fieldwork, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map, Soil Survey of Tarrant County,
Texas, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) digital soil survey data for Tarrant County, the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), and aerial photographs of the
proposed project site were studied to identify possible waters of the United States and areas prone to wetland
development. Ms. Ransley Welch and Ms. Katelyn Kowalczyk of IES delineated all potential waters of the United
States in the field in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) procedures on 01 April 2009. A
second site visit was performed by Ms. Katelyn Kowalczyk and Mr. Shae Kipp on 27 August 2010 to verify the April
2009 delineation. Due to the site being in a highly disturbed, urban corridor, the project site was revisited by Mr.
Shae Kipp and Mr. Toby Settle on 21 April 2015 to verify potential waters of the United States.
Wetland delineations were performed on location using the methodology outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plains
Region (Version 2.0). The presence of a wetland is determined by the positive indication of three criteria (i.e.,
hydrophytic vegetation, hydrology, and hydric soils). Potential jurisdictional boundaries for other water resources
(i.e., non-wetland) were delineated in the field at the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The 33 CFR 328.3(e)
defines OHWM as the line on the shore/bank established by flowing and/or standing water, marked by
characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, erosion shelving, changes in the character of
soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider
the characteristics of the surrounding areas.
Water feature boundaries were recorded on a Trimble GeoExplorer XT global positioning system (GPS) unit capable
of sub-meter accuracy. Photographs were also taken at representative points within the project site.
RESULTS
Literature Review
The USGS topographic map (Haltom City 7.5’ Quadrangle, 1982) illustrated one unnamed tributary flowing from
north to south across the project site (Attachment C-1, Figure 2). The topography of the project site generally
slopes towards the tributary and ultimately to the south.
The Soil Survey of Tarrant County, Texas mapped four soil series in the project corridor and illustrated one
unnamed tributary flowing from north to south across the project site. These soils included Sanger-Urban land
complex, 1 to 5 percent slopes; Sanger clay 1 to 3 percent slopes; Frio-Urban land complex, occasionally flooded;
and Aledo-Bolar-Urban land complex 3 to 20 percent. None of these soil series are listed on the National Hydric
Soils list prepared by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (revision April 2014) (Attachment C-1,
Figure 3).
The FEMA FIRM (Panel 48439C0290J and 48439C0280J, effective 23 August 2000) illustrated the site within Zone
AE (special flood hazard areas inundated by 100-year flood with base flood elevations determined) and floodway
areas in Zone AE of an unnamed tributary (Attachment C-1, Figures 4a and 4b).
Site Survey
The project was characterized as having two distinct plant communities - riparian corridor and an upland
grassland community. Though the vegetation within the communities often overlapped between communities,
the dominance and density of the species varied distinctly. The riparian corridor included tree species such as
sugar hackberry (Celtis laevigata), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), cottonwood (Populus deltoides), Osage
orange (Maclura pomifera), and eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), black willow (Salix nigra), and American
elm (Ulmus americana). Herbaceous species included common ryegrass (Lolium perenne), Johnsongrass (Sorghum
halepense), evening primrose (Oenothera specioa), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and tall fescue (Festuca
arundinacea).
ATTACHMENT C DELINEATION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Page 2 of 5
SWF-2010-00470
The upland grassland community was dominated by species such as Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), greenbrier
(Smilax bona‐nox), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), annual ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), Canada wildrye
(Elymus canadensis), Johnsongrass, Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon), and common dandelion (Taraxacum
officinale).
The current land use surrounding the site is primarily residential, with most of the project corridor being lined with
residential fenced yards or recreational parks. Lebow Channel was downcut three to 10 feet deep, below the
residential properties. The topography of the area was relatively flat. The site ranged in elevation from 600 above
mean sea level (amsl) to 660 amsl. Lebow Channel drains into the West Fork Trinity River, which is considered a
traditional navigable water (TNW), about 0.5 mile from the end of the project corridor.
A total of four potentially jurisdictional waters, Lebow Channel, two unnamed tributaries, and a forested wetland
were delineated within the project corridor and detailed below (Attachment C-1, Figure 5 and Table 1).
Table 1. Waters Delineated in Project Study Area
Water Identification
Post-Rapanos
Water Feature
Classification
Water of the
United States
Hydraulic
Characteristics
Length
(Linear
Feet)
Area
(Acre)
Wetland 1 Adjacent to a RPW Yes Forested Wetland NA 0.54
Tributary 1
(Lebow Channel) RPW Yes Intermittent 17,961 4.53
Tributary 2 Non-RPW Yes Ephemeral 684 0.06
Tributary 3 Non-RPW Yes Ephemeral 254 0.09
APPROXIMATE JURISDICTIONAL TOTAL 18,899 5.22
Tributary 1 (Lebow Channel) is an intermittent tributary aligned though a primarily residential area. The tributary
would be considered to have intermittent flow because there was observed water flow and standing water during
the site visit, which was assumed to be an influence of groundwater. For these reasons, Tributary 1 would also be
considered a relatively permanent water (RPW). The tributary has been split into four reaches to help illustrate
the details of each reach.
• Reach A began at DeRidder Avenue in a residential area. The segment was surrounded by a riparian
corridor and the channel was lined with residential backyards about three to 10 feet from the banks of
channel. The riparian corridor was dominated by species that are typically found in residential lawns such
as Bermudagrass, dandelions, and wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera). The limits of this tributary were identified
and delineated at the OHWM in the field based on bed and bank and natural line pressed into the bank.
The OHWM varied from two to 25 feet.
• Reach B began near Meacham Middle School. This section was channelized through the residential area
with a concrete bottom and six foot side walls. The riparian corridor began at the top of the concrete wall
and was dominated by tree species such as green ash, sugar hackberry, and cedar elm. The OHWM was
between two to 30 feet, delineated in the field based on natural line pressed on the bank. A large section
of Reach B was channelized in an underground culvert beginning at Long Avenue and continuing
approximately 720 feet under Long Avenue and railroad tracks.
• Reach C was a rock-lined section of the channel. The riparian corridor of this section was densely
vegetated with herbaceous species such as Canada wildrye, green briar, and poison ivy. This section had
an OHWM ranging from two to 20 feet delineated in the field based on destruction of terrestrial
vegetation and natural line pressed on the bank. Much of this section was located parallel to Decatur
Avenue and was heavily influenced by anthropomorphic factors.
• Reach D was located near the end of the project corridor in Trail Drivers Park. This segment had
downcutting from with depths from the top of bank of four to 10 feet. There was a limited riparian
corridor dominated mostly by Bermudagrass with sparse tree cover such as Osage orange and American
elm. The OHWM was between two to 20 feet delineated in the field based on natural line impressed on
the bank. Reach D ended the project corridor just north of the confluence of Lebow with the West Fork
Trinity River, south of Brennan Avenue.
ATTACHMENT C DELINEATION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Page 3 of 5
SWF-2010-00470
It is IES’ professional opinion that all four segments of Tributary 1 would be considered waters of the United States
and therefore be regulated under Section 404 of the CWA.
Tributary 2 was located within the proposed Upper Lebow detention area. Tributary 2 had a woody riparian
corridor dominated by sugar hackberry, boxelder (Acer negundo), green ash, American elm, and gum bumelia
(Sideroxylon lanuginosum) with limited herbaceous cover. The OHWM of Tributary 2 was identified and delineated
in the field based on the presence of a natural line impressed on the bank, toe of slope, and natural shelving. Due
to the lack of standing or flowing water observed during the site visit, this tributary would be considered a non-
RPW and would require the significant nexus test to determine the jurisdictional nature of this water feature.
Tributary 3 was located adjacent to Tributary 1 (Lebow Channel) in the southern end of the project area. Tributary
3 had a woody riparian corridor dominated by sugar hackberry, boxelder, green ash and American elm. The
OHWM of Tributary 3 was identified and delineated in the field based on destruction of terrestrial vegetation. Due
to the lack of standing or flowing water observed during the site visit, this tributary would be considered a non-
RPW and would require the significant nexus test to determine the jurisdictional nature of this water feature.
Wetland 1 was located adjacent to Tributary 2 in the proposed Upper Lebow detention area. The wetland was
dominated by hydrophytic vegetation including green ash, black willow, American elm, giant ragweed and
smartweed (Polygonum spp.). Primary hydrological indicators present during the surveys included water marks,
saturation, and oxidized rhizospheres on living roots. Secondary hydrological indicators included drainage patterns
within the wetland. Hydric soil indicators included a low chroma soil matrix of 7.5 YR 3/1 with 10YR 4/6
redoximorphic concentrations both in the matrix and along pore linings. Since this wetland is adjacent to a non-
RPW tributary (Tributary 2) a significant nexus test must be performed to determine the potential jurisdictional
status..
Significant Nexus Determination
As non-RPWs, Tributaries 2 and 3, and Wetland 1 require a significant nexus test to determine the jurisdictional
nature of these water features. The significant nexus test must prove direct flow or an indirect hydrological,
biological, and chemical connection to a TNW.
Tributary 2 has an indirect biological connection to a TNW because it contained a woody riparian community that
provides not only habitat for a variety of wildlife, but the detritus the vegetation creates, provides the basis of a
food web that supports a large wildlife community downstream. Additionally, indirect chemical connection is
demonstrated by the riparian corridors adjacent to Tributary 2. The riparian corridor provides for nutrient and
chemical uptake of waters that flow within the channel and waters that percolate into the soils. This nutrient and
chemical uptake in these headwaters provide for a reduced nutrient/chemical loading in the downstream water
column. Tributary 2 is hydrologically connected to Tributary 1 (Lebow Channel) and ultimately to the West Fork
Trinity River, which is considered TNW. It is IES’ opinion that this tributary meets a definition of a water of the
United States due to its physical characteristics and indirect biological, chemical, and hydrological connection to a
TNW and therefore be regulated under Section 404 of the CWA.
Tributary 3 has an indirect biological connection to a TNW because it contained a woody riparian community that
provides not only habitat for a variety of wildlife, but the detritus the vegetation creates, provides the basis of a
food web that supports a large wildlife community downstream. Additionally, indirect chemical connection is
demonstrated by the riparian corridors adjacent to Tributary 3. The riparian corridor provides for nutrient and
chemical uptake of waters that flow within the channel and waters that percolate into the soils. This nutrient and
chemical uptake in these headwaters provide for a reduced nutrient/chemical loading in the downstream water
column. Tributary 3 is hydrologically connected to Tributary 1 and ultimately to the West Fork Trinity River, which
is considered TNW. It is IES’ opinion that this tributary meets a definition of a water of the United States due to its
physical characteristics and indirect biological, chemical, and hydrological connection to a TNW and therefore be
regulated under Section 404 of the CWA.
Wetland 1 provides biological functions as it provides not only habitat for amphibians and invertebrates, but also
food web support to downstream fish and other animals. Wetland 1 provides chemical connection by collecting
water through minimal detention and retention processes, which allows for sediment and nutrients to be filtered
out of the water column prior to going downstream. Wetland 1 has an indirect connection to the West Fork Trinity
ATTACHMENT C DELINEATION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Page 4 of 5
SWF-2010-00470
River through Tributary 2 and Tributary 1 (Lebow Channel). It is IES’ professional opinion that this wetland would
meet a definition of a water of the United States and therefore be regulated under Section 404 of the CWA.
ATTACHMENT C DELINEATION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Page 5 of 5
SWF-2010-00470
ATTACHMENT C-1
FIGURES
0 3,000 6,0001,500 Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: ESRI 10 Streetmap North America
Figure 1
General Location Map
Mount OlivetCemetery
Fort WorthFort WorthMeacham InternationalMeacham InternationalAirportAirport Little Fossil CreekMarine Creek Lebow St
N E 2 2 n d S t
Bruce StNE 3 1 s t S t
Watauga Ct WWatauga Ct ESchadt CtWisteria CtD i a m o n d
R d
Pap
urt Dr
N E 3 2 n d S t
M o rn in g
G lo ry A ve
N E 3 4 th S t
N E 3 5 t h S t
N W 2 7 t h S t
E E x c h a n g e
A v e Hardy StKe
lli Ct
Perry StN o r th g l e n D r Mapleleaf StOakhurst Scenic DrC o r n i n g Av e
M i neol a St
D e R id d e r S t
C ardinal LnN E 2 3 r d S t Quentin CtN E 3 7 th S t
N Jones StSmilax AveI v e y S t
N E 3 0 t h S t
L e m i n g S t
S o u th e rn S tN W 29th
S t
S e l m a
S tFontaine StK i m b o
R dBethlehem StD ix ie S t Zwolle StBluebonnet DrR e p p e r
S t
Dooling StGuent
her AveN W 2 6 t h
S t
N W 2 5 t h
S t
N W 2 4 t h
S t
N W 2 3 r d
S t
Ve r a
C r u z S t
P r i m r o s e
A v e
O x f o r d S t
A s t e r A v e
G l e n d o r a
S t
G e m i n i
P k y
Cold Springs RdChesser Boyer RdPackers StMoore AveNiles City BlvdStrohl StMark Iv PkyMercantile Plaza DrEv a S t
D u n d e e A v e
N E 3 3 rd S tN Commerce StN E 2 9 t h S tN Terry StN Elm StN Nichols StN Crump StN Harding StHale AveN E 2 1 s t S t
S t o c k y a r d s
B l v d
Industrial DrC a r n a t i o n
A v e
St
N Hays StSamuel
s AveBer ner St
N Houston StS el ene St
M a y d e l l S t
M ic h a e l S t
N o r m an S t
Peak StS a l i s b u r y A v e
Warfield StFalcon WayGlendale AveH o n e y s u c k l e
Av eRay Simon DrParsons Ln
H ig h
C r e s t Av e
M a r i g o l d A v e
B r u c e
A v eDeen RdG o l d e n r o d A v e
W L o tu s
A v e
Altamont Dr
D e R id d e r Av e
NE 3 8 t h S t
Schadt StE L o r a in e S t
Ellis AveD a is y L nHutchinson StLulu StBraswell DrElaine Pl
N E 3 6 t h S t
Grace AveN Grove StN Calhoun StCra
btr
e
e
S
t
I r i o n A v e Premier StOscar AveNeches StWeber StD e w e y S t Grover AveRunnels StD o w n i n g D r
N Pecan StBrennan AveN Hampton StJ a s p e r S t
B e a u m o n t S t
Wataug a R dSchwartz AveDecatur AveBusiness 287Sylvania AveL on g Av e
E L o n g A v e
E Northside
D
r
T e r m i n a l R dBlue Mound RdN Sylvania AveDeen RdST183
¨§¦35W
Limits of Project Improvements
1 inch = 1,750 feet
T a r r a n t
T a r r a n t
C o u n t y
C o u n t y
ST183
ST121ST199
£¤347
£¤377
£¤287
¨§¦30
¨§¦35W
¨§¦820
Fort WorthFort Worth
SaginawSaginaw
Map Extent
Figure 2
United States Geological Survey
Topographic Map
1 inch = 1,750 feet
0 3,500 7,0001,750
Feet
County: Tarrant
State: Texas
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date map created: 06/09/2015
Source: USGS Haltom City
7.5' Quadrangle, 1982
.
Survey Area
Figure 3
Soil Series located
Within the Survey Area
1 inch = 1,750 feet
0 3,500 7,0001,750
Feet
County: Tarrant
State: Texas
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date map created: 06/09/2015
Source: 2012 NRCS Soil Survey Database,
USGS Haltom City 7.5' Quadrangle, 1982
.Survey Area
Soils
10 - Bastil Urban Land Complex, 0 to 5 percent slopes
28 - Frio-Urban Land Complex
3 - Aledo-Bolar-Urban Land Complex, 3 to 20 percent slopes
65 - Sanger Clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes
67 - Sanger-Urban Land Complex, 1 to 5 percent slopes
81 - Urban Land
Figure 4a
Federal Emergency Management
Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map
Upper Lebow
1 inch = 750 feet01,500 3,000750Feet
County: Tarrant
State: Texas
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date map created: 06/09/2015
Source: FEMA FIRM Map Panels
48439C0290J and 48439C0280J
.Survey Area
FEMA FIRM Zone DescriptionsZone X - Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual
chance floodplainZone X - Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance
flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than
1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance flood
Zone AE - Special Flood Hazard Areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual
chance flood; Base flood elevations determined
Zone AE - Floodway areas in Zone AE
Zone A - Special Flood Hazard Areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual
chance flood; No base flood elevations determined
Figure 4b
Federal Emergency Management
Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map
Lower Lebow
1 inch = 800 feet01,600 3,200800Feet
County: Tarrant
State: Texas
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date map created: 06/09/2015
Source: FEMA FIRM Map Panels
48439C0290J and 48439C0280J
.Survey Area
FEMA FIRM Zone DescriptionsZone X - Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual
chance floodplainZone X - Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance
flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than
1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance flood
Zone AE - Special Flood Hazard Areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual
chance flood; Base flood elevations determined
Zone AE - Floodway areas in Zone AE
Zone A - Special Flood Hazard Areas subject to inundation by the 1% annual
chance flood; No base flood elevations determined
Figure 5
Water Features within
Project Area
1 inch = 1,750 feet
0 3,500 7,0001,750
Feet
County: Tarrant
State: Texas
USACE Project # SFW-2010-00470
Date map created: 06/11/2015
Source: ESRI 10 Aerial with Lables
.
Project Area
Features that meet a definition of a waters of the United States
Tributary
Wetland
Tributary 1
(Lebow Creek)
Tributary 2
Tributary 3
Wetland 1
ATTACHMENT D REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph Location Map
1 inch = 1,575 feet
0 3,200 6,4001,600
Feet
County: Tarrant
State: Texas
Date map created: 05/28/2015
Source: 2012 USDA FSA TOP
Aerial Photography
Photograph Locations
Features determined to meet a definition of waters of the United States
Lebow
.
Photograph 1 Photograph 2
Photograph 3 Photograph 4
Photograph 5 Photograph 6
Photograph 7 Photograph 8
Photograph 9 Photograph 10
Photograph 11 Photograph 12
Photograph 13 Photograph 14
Photograph 15 Photograph 16
Photograph 17 Photograph 18
Photograph 19 Photograph 20
Photograph 21 Photograph 22
Photograph 23 Photograph 24
Photograph 25 Photograph 26
Photograph 27 Photograph 28
Photograph 29 Photograph 30
Photograph 31 Photograph 32
Photograph 33 Photograph 34
ATTACHMENT E TABLE OF WATERS OF THE US IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Attachment E: Table of Waters of the U.S. Impacted by the Proposed Project
Waterbody
ID1
Latitude and
Longitude
(Decimal Degrees)
Resource
Type2
Linear Feet
in Project
Area
Acres in
Project
Area
Impact
Type3
Linear
Feet of
Impact
Acres of
Impact
Cubic Yards of
Material to be
Discharged
Activity
Type4
e.g., W-1 32.755°N, 97.755°W NFW - 0.25 D/P - 0.15 1210 FP
Tributary 1
(Lebow
Channel)
32.802N, 97.331W IS 17,955 4.53 D/P 13,313 3.36 5,598 DR/FP
Tributary 2 32.810N, 97.329W ES 684 0.06 D/P 684 0.06 97 DR/FP
Wetland 1 32.809N, 97.329W FW NA 0.54 D/P NA 0.54 871 DR/FP
NFW subtotal – – – –
FW subtotal – – 0.54 – 0.54 871 –
PS subtotal – – – –
IS subtotal – – 17,955 4.53 – 13,313 3.36 5,598 –
ES subtotal – – 684 0.06 – 684 0.06 97 –
I subtotal – – – –
TOTAL – – 18,639 5.13 – 13,997 3.96 6,566 –
1 Waterbody ID may be the name of a feature or an assigned label such as “W-1” for a wetland.
2 Resource Types: NFW – Non-forested wetland, FW – Forested wetland, PS – Perennial Stream,
IS – Intermittent Stream, ES – Ephemeral Stream, I – Impoundment
3 Impact Types: D/P – Direct* and Permanent, D/T – Direct and Temporary, I/P – Indirect** and Permanent, I/T – Indirect and Temporary
* Direct impacts are here defined as those adverse affects caused by the proposed activity, such as discharge or excavation.
** Indirect impacts are here defined as those adverse affects caused subsequent to the proposed activity, such as flooding or effects
of drainage on adjacent waters of the U.S.
ATTACHMENT F ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
ATTACHMENT F ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 1 of 4
PROJECT PURPOSE AND GOAL
Lebow Channel is the main drainage feature throughout this sub-watershed basin that conveys a
significant amount of water during larger storm events. However, this channel does not convey the 100 -
year storm event within the channel; thereby resulting in a larger floodplain through this urban area.
Many residences and commercial structures become inundated during these larger storm events.
Significant flood hazards that have occurred along Lower Lebow include inundated creek crossings,
inundation of Decatur Avenue (along with other road crossings), flooded structures, and the loss of life on
two occasions. The overall purpose of the proposed project is to reduce the urban area that is inundated
by these larger flood events. The City of Fort Worth’s goal is to use this channel enhancement project to
reduce the floodplain in the highly urbanized segments of the channel, thereby reducing flooding of road,
property damage, and reducing the safety issues that have occurred during flooding, while enhancing the
environmental benefits within the less urbanized segment.
PROJECT LOCATION ALTERNATIVES
This is a site specific project to alleviate flooding conditions within a particular watershed that has
significant public health and safety concerns. Therefore, there are no other project location alternatives.
PROJECT CONSTRAINTS
The following are major considerations to the planning process associated with alleviating the flooding
hazards associated with Lebow Channel.
Nearly the entire watershed and floodplain of Lebow Channel has been urbanized for more than
50 years. There are portions that are dominated by residential structures/developments and
other areas have commercial/industrial structures. At the time that this watershed developed,
there was little concern of flooding or floodplains as demonstrated by the number of structures
built adjacent to the channel. The project planning and phasing considered the density of
structures in each project segment to evaluate the impacts associated with encroachment and
potential relocation.
As the area developed, the road network was planned and constructed on a grid basis resulting in
numerous road crossings of the Lebow Channel and a major thoroughfare, Decatur Avenue,
paralleling the channel for a distance. Project alternatives considered the appropriate sizing of
the existing culverts, potential for bridging the channel to reduce impacts, and the potential for
removing unnecessary roads.
A significant constraint was the existing culverted section of Lebow Channel under the railroad
line and Long Avenue which, due to the grade constraints of rail lines, would be a significant cost
to redesign and reconstruct this culvert system. Due to the significant cost associated with
redesigning this culvert, the alternatives analysis considered ways to accommodate this existing
culvert structure.
There are numerous utilities, both private and public, that service the area. The alternative s
analysis considered the potential impacts or avoidance associated with the utilities for both cost
of relocation and safety of construction.
ATTACHMENT F ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 2 of 4
There is a significant cost to correct the overriding flooding issue adjacent to Lebow Channel. As
the City of Fort Worth will be funding this project with their stormwater fund, the project will be
staged over numerous years. The project alternatives were developed in a manner so that the
project can be segmented in smaller and more manageable sub-projects to accommodate limited
funding. As the project was divided into segments, each segment was sequenced to provide a
positive or neutral benefit to local flooding.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS
There are limited design alternatives that accomplish the project’s purpose and goals while considering
the constraints in the area. Table 1 provides a general summary.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Each of the design alternatives has positives and negatives when considered for the entire length of the
project. Once the existing infrastructure constraints are considered there are merits for combining
particular design alternatives. However, bypass culverts were not considered within this project corridor
as there was no location that could accommodate the beneficial use of this design type. Through the
study of the existing infrastructure, constraints, and cost, there was only one design alternative that would
accommodate the project’s goals, while having the least disruption to the human and ecological
environments. The following is a description of the considered alternatives.
No Build – Not performing any improvements to the watershed would result in the continued health and
human safety concerns. There would be continued flood hazards to hundreds of structures, both
residences and businesses, and roadways. The risk associated with loss of life would continue to persist.
Lebow Channel Improvements (Build Alternative) – The project was divided into an upper and lower
sections based on the project constraints, which provided the ability to incorporate different design
alternatives into different segments. The Lower Lebow segments included the use of Floodplain
Restoration, No Grading, Remove Structures from Floodplain, and Bypass Channels design alternatives.
The Upper Lebow segments only lend to Creek Channelization design alternatives. The following describe
the design alternatives in each section.
Lower Lebow Channel Improvements
In general, the Lower Lebow Channel improvements favor restoration of a more natural floodplain due to
the lower density of structures. This will include wider benched areas, flatter banks and more meander of
the corridor. The channel improvements will consist of expanding channel capacity by excavating a broad
earthen channel with gently sloping banks and a low-flow channel in the bottom. Several drop structures
have been proposed to create a channel section and flow line slope which will maintain channel capacity
and reduces erosive velocities. Design alternatives were considered for Dewey Street and Brennan
Avenue. Structural and grading improvement options were considered for both streets based on impact
to adjacent properties, constructability, property acquisition needs, construction costs and environmental
impacts.
ATTACHMENT F ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 3 of 4
Table 1. Potential Design Alternatives by Type
Design
Alternative Description Pro’s Con’s
Floodplain
Restoration
Construct new, reduced floodplain, through over-bank
excavation. This would require purchase of some
structures, but not all structures, within the existing 100-
year floodplain
Reduces impacts to the creek,
improves the floodplain connectivity
associated with a bankfull discharge,
and restores floodplain functions. If
conducted in the southern portion of
the project (i.e., Lower Lebow), this
design alternative would have some
residential relocations. This design
alternative could be conducted to
accommodate the removal of
roadway flood hazards. This
minimizes the need for separate
valley storage mitigation. Design
can be segmented.
If conducted in the northern portion
of the project (i.e., Upper Lebow),
there could be a significant number
of residential relocation required. To
effectively accommodate this
alternative, property acquisition for
some parts of the project area would
need to be accomplished on both
sides of the creek. Increased cost in
densely populated areas.
No Grading,
Remove
Structures from
Floodplain
Purchase of all structures in existing floodplain, which
would remove the flooding hazard associated with
houses and businesses
There would be no disruptions to the
existing creeks functions. There
would be no need for separate valley
storage mitigation. Design can be
segmented.
Significant cost, there would be a
public opinion and social/economic
impact to the local area as there are
hundreds of structures in the
floodplain. As the creek has been
encroached upon, this alternative
does not have a benefit for restoring
the natural channel design and
function. Without re-construction of
the roadways, this alternative would
still result in the roadways being
inundated by floods.
Bypass Channels Parallel channels that add conveyance and storage of
water that the existing channel does not provide
Reduces impacts to the existing
creek as only grading within the
channel is associated with the
bypass channel entrance and exit.
Bypass channel would have to be
near the existing creek to avoid
construction against the grade.
Numerous structures would have to
be purchased and existing roadways
would be redesigned and relocated.
This design alternative cannot be
segmented and would be cost
prohibitive.
Bypass Culverts Similar to Bypass Channels, this alternative would make
subterranean conduits to assist in conveying floodwaters.
Culverting the floodplain flows could
be accomplished with beneficial land
use such as roads (i.e., the culvert
system could be built under an
existing road). Reduces impacts to
the existing creek as the only
grading within the channel is
associated with the bypass culvert
entrance and exit.
This alternative does not address
valley storage; detention would need
to be accommodated within the
project. There are very few
locations where there is symbiotic
land use (i.e., there are no roadways
that parallel the creek that
accommodate the grades). There
would be a loss of natural ecological
floodplain functions. This design
alternative cannot be segmented
and would be cost prohibitive.
Creek
Channelization
Following the existing creek alignment, a new creek
channel would be excavated wider and deeper.
This would have the least impacts to
the local population as there would
be very little relocation. This design
alternative could be conducted to
accommodate the removal of
roadway flood hazards. Design can
be segmented.
Creek channelization will have the
most disruption and impacts to
existing stream functions. Due to
the space limitations there would
bank protection requirements of the
banks, with hard armoringbaskets.
This design alternative does not
address valley storage; detention
would need to be accommodated
within the project.
ATTACHMENT F ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 4 of 4
Upper Lebow Channel Improvements
The Upper Lebow Channel has a of higher density residential lots than the Lower Lebow Channel.
Substantial structural improvements and additional channel capacity are required to reduce the flood risk.
The proposed channel consists of hard armoring along the streambanks and a widened, lowered, natural
channel bottom. This section will also include a stormwater detention facility with the capacity to offset
the loss of valley storage associated with the proposed upstream channelization. Design alternatives were
considered for roadway crossings at 36th Street, Weber Street, and De Ridder Avenue. The major
constraints considered at these locations were the channel’s alignment and impact on the existing
residential structures. Each selected alternative was chosen based on the best design for improving
stormwater conveyance in a safe and sustainable method.
ATTACHMENT G DRAWINGS & FIGURES
0 3,000 6,0001,500 Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/25/2011
Source: ESRI 10 Streetmap North America
Sheet 1 of 24
Project Location on Street Map
Mount Olivet
Cemetery
Fort WorthFort Worth
Meacham InternationalMeacham International
AirportAirport Little Fossil CreekMarine Creek Lebow StN E 2 2nd S t
Bruce StNE 31 st St
Watauga Ct WWatauga Ct ESchadt CtWisteria CtD i a mo nd
Rd
Pap
urt Dr
N E 3 2 nd S t
M o rn in g
G lo ry A ve
N E 34 t h S t
N E 35th St
N W 2 7th St
E Ex c ha n g e
Av e Hardy StKe
lli Ct
Perry StN o r t h g le n D r Mapleleaf StOakhurst Scenic DrC o r n i n g Av e
Mineola St
De Ridder St
C ardinal LnN E 2 3 rd St Quentin CtN E 3 7th St
N Jones StSmilax AveI v e y S t
N E 30th S t
L e m i n g S t
S o u th e rn S tN W 2 9th
St
S e l m a
S tFontaine StK i m b o
R dBethlehem StD i xie St Zwolle StBluebonnet DrR e p p e r
S t
Dooling StGuent
her AveN W 2 6 t h
S t
N W 2 5 t h
S t
N W 2 4 t h
S t
N W 2 3 r d
St
Ve r a
Cru z S t
P r i m r o s e
A v e
O x f o r d St
Ast e r Ave
G l e n d o r a
S t
G e m in i
P k y
Cold Springs RdChesser Boyer R dPackers StMoore AveNiles City BlvdStrohl StMark Iv PkyMercantile Plaza DrE va St
D u n d e e Av e
N E 3 3 rd S tN Commerce StN E 2 9 t h StN Terry StN Elm StN Nichols StN Crump StN Harding StHale AveNE 2 1 st St
S t o c k y a r d s
B l v d
Industrial DrC a r n a t io n
A v e
St
N Hays StSamuel
s AveBerner St
N Houston StSelene St
M ayd e l l St
M i chae l S t
Norman St
Peak StS a l i s b u r y Av e
Warfield StFalcon WayGlendale AveH o n e ys u c k l e
Av eRay Simon DrParsons Ln
H i gh
C r e s t Av e
M a r i g o l d A v e
B r u c e
Av eDeen RdG o l d e n r o d Ave
W Lo t u s
Ave
Altamont Dr
D e R id d er A v e
N E 38 t h St
Schadt StE L o r a i ne S t
Ellis AveD a is y L nHutchinson StLulu StBraswell D r
Elaine Pl
N E 3 6 t h St
Grace AveN Grove StN Calhoun StCr
a
btr
e
e
S
t
I r i o n A v e Premier StOscar AveNeches StWeber StD e w e y S t Grover AveRunnels StD o w n i n g D r
N Pecan StBrennan AveN Hampton StJaspe r St
Beaum o n t S t
Watauga R dSchwartz AveDecatur AveBusiness 287Sylvania AveLong
Ave
E L o n g A v e
E
N
orth
s
i
d
e Dr
Te r m i n a l R dBlue Mound RdN Sylvania AveDeen RdST183
¨§¦35W
Limits of Project Improvements
1 inch = 1,750 feet
TarrantTarrant
CountyCounty
ST183
ST121ST199
tu347
tu377
tu287
¨§¦30
¨§¦35W
¨§¦820
Fort WorthFort Worth
SaginawSaginaw
Map Extent
0 3,500 7,0001,750 Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/25/2011
Source: USGS Topographic Map
Haltom City 7.5' Quadrangle, 1982
Sheet 2 of 24
Project Location on U.S. Geological
Survey Topographic Map Limits of Project Improvements
1 inch = 2,000 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 3a of 24
Proposed Jurisdictional Determination
within Limits of Project Improvements
Tributary 1
Tributary 3StrohlPeakGuentherLuluNicholsHardy Schwartz30ThDecatur
Oxford
VeraCruz
183
Brennan
23RdNeal
Exchange
PerryGroveOscarDewey
28Th
Warwick
GlendaleIrion
31St
Moore29Th
DundeeMaloneGlendoraAlleyWeberLoraine
Diamond
Hutchinson32Nd
Ohio
SalisburyPecanSouthern GroverSchadtRunnelsHamptonHardingCrumpElmHaysTerryStockyards HalePackersNilesCityLimits of Project Improvements
Features that meet a definition of a Water of the United States
Tributary
1 inch = 800 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/25/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 3b of 24
Proposed Jurisdictional Determination
within Limits of Project Improvements
37ThBlue MoundDeen33RdSchwar
t
z Runnels
RampOscar
De Ridder
SchadtWeberDecaturLebowEva
38Th
Terminal
HamptonDiamond
Elain
e
Downing
Driveway
Ne
ch
es
LuluCorning
Dixie ZwolleRepperStrohl
CrumpElmNicholsHardingTerry35Th
Brothers
Michael
FontaineNorman
Jasper
LongHardySelene Grover36Th
Parking Lot
Beaumont
Pars
o
n
s
Alta
m
o
n
t
34Th
Maydell
Tributary 1
Wetland 1
Tributary 2
Limits of Project Improvements
Features that meet a definition of a Water of the United States
Tributary
Forested Wetland
1 inch = 800 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
Ü
State: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 4a of 24
Proposed Unavoidable Impacts to
Proposed Waters of the U.S.
Tributary 1
Tributary 3StrohlPeakGuentherLuluNicholsHardy Schwartz30ThDecatur
Oxford
VeraCruz
183
Brennan
23RdNeal
Exchange
PerryGroveOscarDewey
28Th
Warwick
GlendaleIrion
31St
Moore29Th
DundeeMaloneGlendoraAlleyWeberLoraine
Diamond
Hutchinson32Nd
Ohio
SalisburyPecanSouthern GroverSchadtRunnelsHamptonHardingCrumpElmHaysTerryStockyards HalePackersNilesCityLimits of Project Improvements
Impacts to Waters of the United States
Features that meet a definition of a Water of the United States
Tributary
1 inch = 800 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
Ü
State: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/25/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 4b of 24
Proposed Unavoidable Impacts to
Proposed Waters of the U.S.
37ThBlue MoundDeen33RdSchwar
t
z Runnels
RampOscar
De Ridder
SchadtWeberDecaturLebowEva
38Th
Terminal
HamptonDiamond
Elain
e
Downing
Driveway
Ne
ch
es
LuluCorning
Dixie ZwolleRepperStrohl
CrumpElmNicholsHardingTerry35Th
Brothers
Michael
FontaineNorman
Jasper
LongHardySelene Grover36Th
Parking Lot
Beaumont
Pars
o
n
s
Alta
m
o
n
t
34Th
Maydell
Tributary 1
Wetland 1
Tributary 2
Limits of Project Improvements
Impacts to Waters of the United States
Features that meet a definition of a Water of the United States
Tributary
Forested Wetland 1 inch = 800 feet
Sheet 5 of 24Typical Cross-Sections - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 6a of 24
Project Overview Map
Sheet 7 of 24
Sheet 8 of 24
Sheet 9 of 24
Sheet 10 of 24
Sheet 14 of 24
Sheet 13 of 24
Sheet 12 of 24
Sheet 11 of 24
Sheet 15 of 24
PeakGuentherLuluNicholsHardySchwartz30ThDecaturStrohlVeraCruz
183
Brennan
Neal
Exchange
Oxford
PerryOscarDewey
28ThGrove
GlendaleIrion
Warwick
31St
Moore29Th
Long
MaloneGlendora Alley
Dundee
33Rd
WeberLoraine
Diamond
Hutchinson32Nd
Ohio
SalisburyPecanSouthern GroverSchadtRunnelsHamptonHardingCrumpElmHaysTerryStockyards HalePackersNilesCityLimits of Project Improvements
Sheet Match Lines
1 inch = 800 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 6b of 24
Project Overview Map
Sheet 16 of 24
Sheet 17 of 24
Sheet 18 of 24
Sheet 19 of 24
Sheet 21 of 24
Sheet 23 of 24
Sheet 22 of 24
Sheet 20 of 24
Sheet 15 of 24
37ThBlue MoundDeen33RdSchwar
t
z Runnels
HaleRampOscar
De Ridder
SchadtWeberDecaturLebowEva
38Th
Terminal
HamptonElain
e
Downing
Driveway
Ne
ch
es
LuluCorning
Dixie ZwolleRepperStrohl
CrumpElmNicholsHardingTerry35Th
Brothers
Michael
FontaineNorman
Jasper
LongHardySelene Grover36Th
Parking Lot
Beaumont
Pars
o
n
s
Alta
m
o
n
t
34Th
Maydell
Limits of Project Improvements
Sheet Match Lines
1 inch = 800 feet
Sheet 7 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 8 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 9 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 10 of 25Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 11 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 12 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 13 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 14 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 15 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 16 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 17 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 18 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 19 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 20 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 21 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 22 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 23 of 24Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
Ü
State: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/25/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 24a of 24
Proposed On-Site Compensatory
Mitigation Areas StrohlPeakGuentherLuluNicholsHardySchwartz30ThDecatur
Oxford
Vera Cruz
183
Brennan
23RdNeal
Exchange
PerryGroveOscarDewey
28Th
Warwick
GlendaleIrion
31St
Moore29Th
DundeeMaloneGlendoraAlleyWeberLoraine
Diamond
Hutchinson32Nd
Ohio
SalisburyPecanSouthern GroverSchadtRunnelsHamptonHardingCrumpElmHaysTerryStockyards HalePackersNilesCityLimits of Project Improvements
On-Site Compensatory Mitigation Areas
Riparian Area Enhancements
Stream Channel Improvements
1 inch = 800 feet
0 1,400 2,800700Feet
Ü
State: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Sheet 24b of 24
Proposed On-Site
Compensatory Mitigation Areas
37ThBlue MoundDeen33RdSchwar
t
z Runnels
RampOscar
De Ridder
SchadtWeberDecaturLebowEva
38Th
Terminal
HamptonDowning
DrivewayElain
e
Ne
ch
es
LuluDixie ZwolleRepperStrohl
CrumpElmNicholsHardingTerry35Th
Brothers
Michael
FontaineNorman
Jasper
LongHardySelene Grover36Th
Beaumont
Parking Lot
Pars
o
n
s
Alta
m
o
n
t
34Th
Maydell
Limits of Project Improvements
On-Site Compensatory Mitigation Areas
Native Grass Plantings
Deep Emergent Wetland
Shallow Emergent Wetland
Riparian Area Enhancements
Stream Channel Improvements
1 inch = 800 feet
ATTACHMENT I HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND CULTURAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
ATTACHMENT J CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name: Lebow Channel Improvements
SWF Permit Number: SWF-2010-00470
Project Location: Fort Worth
Mitigation Site Location: Fort Worth
Watershed: Lower West Fork Trinity, HUC 12030102
County or Counties of Interest: Tarrant
General Project Description
The project corridor contains approximately 17,955 linear feet of intermittent tributary (Lebow Channel),
684 linear feet of ephemeral tributaries, and 0.54 acre of forested wetland. Grading activities would occur
in approximately 13,313 linear feet of intermittent tributary, 684 feet of ephemeral tributary, 0.54 acre of
forested wetland. Approximately 4,642 linear feet of intermittent tributary (Lebow Channel) would not be
graded; therefore, avoided. Based on the project activities, the improved channel length would be
approximately 13,841 linear feet of intermittent tributary, 627 linear feet of ephemeral tributary, and 1.12
acres of emergent wetland. Under the ultimate project conditions, Lebow Channel would be
approximately 19,102 linear feet, an increase of over 1,100 linear feet.
Complete avoidance of this tributary system was not feasible since the tributary system is integral to the
project. For the purpose of this project, Lebow Channel has been divided into two sections at Long
Avenue in Fort Worth, Upper and Lower Lebow. The sections will be further divided into segments for
implementing construction.
The improvements associated with Lower Lebow favor more natural and earthen improvements, while
Upper Lebow favors more traditional channel widening and structural improvements. These areas have
been divided due to the number of structures adjacent to the drainage areas; the amount of road
crossings and bridges; and other health and public safety concerns, which have contributed to secondary
actions, such as the purchase and demolition of residential and commercial properties located within the
100-year floodplain. In general, the proposed conditions for Lower Lebow will include excavating over the
banks to increase channel capacity. The proposed channel would have an approximately 30 to 50 foot
wide channel bottom with 50 to 75 foot wide banks. This widened channel will create higher ecological
floodplain connectivity for the segment. After construction, native trees and native grasses will be planted
along the stream banks. Due to the dense residential development in Upper Lebow, much of the
proposed improvements are designed to reduce the floodplain; thereby reducing inundation of structures
during flooding events of Lebow Channel. The banks will be armored with gabions, limiting the success of
riparian corridor vegetation. The natural channel bottom will vary but will average approximately 40 feet
wide while the existing is approximately 20 feet wide. There will be some limited plantings within this
area, primarily associated with the proposed detention pond north of Long Avenue.
Due to the nature of the project, complete avoidance is not possible. The goal of the project is to reduce
the floodplain of the Lebow Channel, thereby reducing the number of structures and roadways that are
routinely inundated during flood events. Many residences and commercial structures currently flood
during larger storm events. Significant flood hazards that have occurred along Lebow Channel include
inundated creek crossings, inundation of Decatur Avenue, flooded structures, and the loss of life on two
occasions. The City of Fort Worth would like to reduce flooding of road, property damage, and reducing
SWF-2010-00470 Page 1 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
the safety issues that have occurred during flooding while, using this project to create channel
enhancements that benefit the human and natural environment.
Goals and Objectives
The primary goals of the mitigation plan are to replace the lost functions and services associated with
Lebow Channel. The objectives of this mitigation plan are to enhance the ecological functions of the
overall watershed associated with Lebow Channel.
Compensatory Mitigation Plan Organization
This compensatory mitigation plan is organized to provide general details about the types of
compensatory mitigation being proposed for the Lebow Channel Drainage Improvements project. This is
a long-term plan that will be implemented in phases depending upon priority and funding availability for
the action. The City of Fort Worth has developed a Construction Phasing Plan that prioritizes certain
segment of the project. An overview of the plan is included within Part II of Attachment J. Part III
includes the generalized compensatory mitigation activities to occur throughout the project. Specific
details about each segment, including existing and proposed conditions, are included in Part IV.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 2 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
PART II: CONSTRUCTION PRIORITY AND SEQUENCING PLAN
Lower Lebow Channel Improvements
In general, the Lower Lebow Channel improvements favor restoration of a more natural floodplain. This
will include wider benched areas, flatter banks, and more meander of the stream and riparian corridor.
The channel improvements will consist of expanding channel capacity by excavating a broad earthen
channel with gently sloping banks and a low-flow channel in the bottom. Several drop structures have
been proposed to create a channel section and flow line slope which will maintain channel capacity and
reduce erosive velocities. Design alternatives were considered for Dewey Street and Brennan Avenue.
Structural and grading improvement options were considered for both streets based on impact to
adjacent properties, constructability, property acquisition needs, construction costs and environmental
impacts.
Upper Lebow Channel Improvements
The Upper Lebow Channel consists of more medium to high density residential lots than the Lower Lebow
Channel. Substantial structural improvements and additional channel capacity are required to reduce the
flood risk. The proposed channel consists of a widened and lowered, gabion-lined (natural bottom)
channel. This section will also include a stormwater detention facility with the capacity to offset impacts
from potential increase in flow as a result of the proposed upstream improvements and the pinch point
created by the culvert located at the railroad line located south of Long Avenue. Design alternatives were
considered at 36th Street, Weber Street, and De Ridder Avenue. The major constraints considered at
these locations were the channel’s alignment and impact on the existing residential structures. Each
selected alternative was chosen based on the best design for improving stormwater conveyance in a safe
and sustainable method.
Project Phasing
In general, the plan recommended in the Lebow Channel Schematic Plan, proposes to construct
improvements in both Lower and Upper Lebow in a downstream to upstream sequence. This will ensure
that projects do not cause any adverse, downstream hydraulic impacts. Exceptions to this sequence are
the roadway crossing improvements in Lower Lebow at Brennan Avenue and Dewey Street, which are
currently under design due to the potential of the roadways being overtopped by floodwaters. These
projects have; therefore, been prioritized above other channel improvements.
The phasing sequence for Upper Lebow Channel requires that the stormwater detention facility be
constructed first. Once the Upper Lebow stormwater detention improvements are in place, the Upper
Lebow Channel improvements have been phased and sequenced by including an upstream roadway
crossing and the associated downstream channel improvements.
The goal of the overall project will be to construct the phasing so that there will be no negative
environmental impact. Any segments that may have negative environmental impacts will be constructed
after a segment with a net positive impact has been constructed to maintain a net positive environmental
benefit.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 3 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
PART III: COMPENSATORY MITIGATION BY TYPE
Baseline Environmental Information of the Project Corridor
Land Use History
The site is currently a residential drainage channel. The areas adjacent to the project are highly developed
with residential, industrial, and commercial facilities.
Local Hydrology
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map (1982) and the Tarrant County Soil Survey (1981)
illustrate Lebow Channel. Lebow Channel is an intermittent tributary aligned though a primarily
residential area. Lebow Channel would be considered to have intermittent flow because there was
observed water flow and standing water during the site visit, which was assumed to be an influence of
groundwater. For these reasons, Lebow Channel would also be considered a relatively permanent water
(RPW). The mitigation areas are currently and would continue to be frequented with hydrology.
Soils
The Tarrant County Soil Survey maps mapped four soil series within the project area. These soils included
Sanger-Urban land complex, 1 to 5 percent slopes; Sanger clay 1 to 3 percent slopes; Frio-Urban land
complex, occasionally flooded; and Aledo-Bolar-Urban land complex 3 to 20 percent.
Existing and Historical Vegetation
The project area and mitigation area are located within the Cross Timber Level III Ecoregion and the Grand
Prairie Level IV Ecoregion, which corresponds with Grand Prairie (085) major land resource area (MLRA), in
the Blackland 30-38" PZ (R085XY177TX) Ecological Site. The Ecological Site Description (ESD) prepared by
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) characterizes the
historical plant community of the mitigation area as tallgrass prairie with scattered live oak (Quercus
virginiana). The grasses are primarily little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), indiangrass (Sorghastrum
nutans), and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) with small amounts of Virginia wildrye (Elymus
virginicus), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), and eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides). Native tree
species included sugar hackberry (Celtis spp.), live oak, elm (Ulmus sp.), and bumelia (Sideroxylon sp.). The
Grand Prairie Ecoregion was primarily dominated by herbaceous species with large wooded areas only
consistently located along larger watercourses, such as the Trinity River. Grazing pressures, reduced fire
frequency, and then urbanization have lead to the encroachment of woody species along most
watercourses in the region.
The existing vegetation within the mitigation area in Upper Lebow was limited due to the encroaching
residential properties. The dominate species in Upper Lebow included Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense),
greenbrier (Smilax bona‐nox), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), annual ragweed (Ambrosia trifida),
Canada wildrye (Elymus canadensis), Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense), Bermudagrass (Cynodon
dactylon), and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), with some tree species such as sugar hackberry
(Celtis laevigata), cottonwood (Populus deltoides), and Osage orange (Maclura pomifera). The existing
vegetation within Lower Lebow included a more riparian community with species such as sugar hackberry,
American elm (Ulmus americana), black willow (Salix nigra), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica),
cottonwood, Osage orange, and eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana).
SWF-2010-00470 Page 4 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Generalized Mitigation Work Plan
The current vegetation community is dominated by early successional native and exotic species in
combination with urbanized landscapes throughout the project corridor, provides structural, hydrologic,
and habitat functions in the floodplain. The objective for this mitigation area is to improve the species
composition, provide higher quality hard mast producing tree and shrub species, larger bunchgrasses for
improved habitat, structural, and hydrologic functions in addition to greater species diversity of wetland
plantings. The existing and proposed vegetation will:
• Increase aboveground biomass to provide more filtering of nutrients,
• Increase nutrient cycling to support downstream foodwebs,
• Improve bulk density of soils through increased organic matter and root masses, which will
improve the water holding capacity of these soils and provide more water storage; and
• Increase the structure and food source for small mammals and other animals (localized foodweb).
The entire mitigation area (except existing and proposed water features), totaling 26.46 acres, will be
planted with a mixture of native prairie grasses, trees and shrubs, and emergent wetland vegetation. The
proposed planting would create a later successional herbaceous component within the mitigation area,
which would increase the filtration ability of the area, as well as increase the wildlife habitat value and soil
stabilization.
There are four general planting types proposed for the mitigation area – wetland plugs and seed mixes
(1.12 acres), herbaceous native seed mixes (7.09 acres), tree/shrub plantings (8.68 acres), and urban
landscaping (8.75 acres). The planting types will be conducted differently for each of the mitigation types
on the project. The planting in all areas will be conducted after the final grading has been completed.
Ideally, the seed mix will be planted in the fall and the trees/shrubs will be planted in winter; however, to
limit temporal losses, the plant materials will be established as soon as final grading of each mitigation
area is completed. To assist in survival if planting is conducted outside the ideal planting season,
temporary irrigation could be utilized to minimize stress on the new plant materials. The amount and
frequency of temporary irrigation will be dependent upon the season and evapotranspiration rates, but all
irrigation materials will be removed at the establishment of the success criteria, as defined in “Generalized
Performance Standards”. Planting details for each of the planting types are provided below. Table 1
indicates the minimum amount of vegetation to be planted.
Table 1. Minimum Amount of Vegetation to be Planted by Segment
Segment
No. Acres Mitigation Type
Trees
(number)
Native
Grass Mix
(pounds)
Wetland
Plugs
(number)
Wetland
Seed Mix
(pounds)
L1 1.97 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 215 59
L3 0.68 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 74 20
L4 1.66 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 181 50
L6 1.85 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 202 56
L7 2.49 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 270 74
U1 1.12 Wetlands 5,421 12
U1 7.09 Native Grasses 213
U2 0.04 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 4 1
SWF-2010-00470 Page 5 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Native Grass Seed Mix
A native grass seed mix will be planted with grass species selected for their adaptability to a wide range of
hydrological conditions as ground cover for disturbed areas until the higher quality tree and shrub species
establish. The native grass areas will include the riparian enhancement areas as a cover crop and the
detention area. Seeds will be drilled into the ground approximately 1/8 to 1/4 inch deep in late fall or
early spring. The planting rate for this mixture will be 30 pounds of pure live seed per acre. An
itemization of the actual amount of seed planted per acre by each native grass species is provided in
Table 2. Any changes to the approved list of species to be planted must be approved by the responsible
USACE official prior to plantings. This modification will include written notification of a change in species
composition and the proposed replacement species.
Table 2. Native Prairie Grass Species and Rate to be Planted in the Mitigation Area
Species Pounds of Pure Live Seed Per Acre
big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) 2.0
blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) 3.8
buffalograss (Buchloe dactyloides) 9.0
eastern gamagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides) 3.6
green sprangletop (Leptochloa dubia) 1.4
indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans) 2.4
little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) 2.2
sand lovegrass (Eragrostis trichodes) 1.2
sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula) 2.8
switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) 1.6
Total 30.0
Riparian Corridor Enhancements (Tree/Shrub Plantings)
The stream and riparian corridor mitigation area will be planted with native trees and shrubs totaling 8.68
acres throughout the Lower Lebow Channel segments (Table 3). Following the herbaceous ground cover
plantings, the mitigation area will be planted with native woody tree species to mimic natural riparian
woodlands in the Cross Timbers/Grand Prairie ecosystems. Containerized stock of at least one to five
gallons trees and shrubs will be planted in the indicated areas to achieve a final density of at least 109 live
stems per acre (approximately 75 percent will be large canopy trees and 25 percent will be small trees and
shrubs). There will be no more than 25 percent of any single tree or shrub species planted in any given
planting area. Planting will occur following the herbaceous ground cover being planted and final grading
being completed. The tree and shrub species to be planted will be selected from the following list,
depending upon availability:
SWF-2010-00470 Page 6 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Table 3. Trees to be Planted within the Riparian Corridor Enhancement Areas
Large Canopy Trees Small Trees and Shrubs
black walnut (Juglans nigra)
bitter pecan (Carya aquatica)
pecan (Carya illinoinensis)
bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa)
Shumard’s oak (Quercus shumardii)
American elm (Ulmus americana)
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
live oak (Quercus virginiana)
red mulberry (Morus rubra)
Osage orange (Maclura pomifera)
cedar elm (Ulmus crassifolia)
hackberry (Celtis laevigata)
chinkapin oak (Quercus muehlenbergii)
sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
slippery/winged elm (Ulmus alata)
box elder (Acer negundo)
• common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana)
• redbud (Cercis canadensis)
• coralberry (Symphoricarpos orbiculatus)
• Chickasaw plum (Prunus angustifolia)
• Mexican plum (Prunus mexicana)
• deciduous yaupon (Ilex decidua)
• buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)
• roughleaf dogwood (Cornus drummondii)
• hawthorne (Crataegus spathulata)
• hawthorne (Crataegus viridis)
• western soapberry
(Sapindus saponaria var. drummondii)
• Eve’s necklace (Styphnolobium affine)
Wetland Creation and Enhancements
The wetland mitigation areas consist of two irregularly shaped depressions within the landscape that will
collect surface runoff from the upstream developed conditions. Water above the wetland capacity will
overflow along the natural gradient, through a surface drainage. To match the aquatic functions, nutrient
cycling, and habitat, these wetlands are designed to be dominated by herbaceous emergent species and
buffered through native tall grass prairie species. All slopes within the wetlands will have 10 to 1 slopes.
After the grading is completed, native topsoil will be spread over the wetlands to provide a growing
medium that has nutrients. The total size of the wetlands will be 1.12 acres consisting of two depressional
areas, with approximately 0.77 acre of shallow emergent wetland and 0.35 acre of deep emergent
wetland.
There are two general planting types proposed for the wetland mitigation area – seed mix and plug
plantings. The planting types will be conducted differently for each of mitigation types on the project.
The planting in all areas will be conducted after the final grading has been completed and in the
appropriate planting season. The seed mix will be planted in the fall and the plugs will be planted in
spring. Planting details for each of the planting types are provided below.
Deep Emergent Wetland – The deep and shallow wetland types will be planted utilizing two techniques
to ensure success. Vegetation establishment in this area is critical, because if vegetation is not
established, cattails will colonize. Once cattails establish, any vegetation planted will most likely fail;
requiring replanting. Therefore, two methods are proposed to hedge for a successful native emergent
wetland plant community. Immediately after grading of the wetland areas, wetland plant seed at
approximately 10 pounds per acre will be cast and raked. Sowing the wetland seed mix is important to
occur prior to the wetland filling with water (i.e., the seed must be cast on to the soil surface to
germinate). After the wetland has filled with water, emergent wetland plant plugs will be planted. The
same seed mix will be spread across both the Deep Emergent Wetland and the Shallow Emergent
Wetland to efficiently plant the entire area. This seed mix will include various species that will establish in
their suitable environmental conditions (i.e., water depth). Any changes to the approved list of species to
be planted must be approved by the responsible USACE official prior to plantings. This modification will
include written notification of a change in species composition and the proposed replacement species.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 7 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
The plant species in the seed mix that will be suitable to the Deep Emergent Wetlands could include
smartweed (Polygonum spp. [Table 4]), water primrose (Ludwigia spp. [see Table 4]), bulrush (Scirpus spp.
[see Table 4]), common rush (Juncus effuses), duck potato (Sagittaria latifolia), water lily (Nymphaea spp.
[see Table 4]), horsetail (Equisetum spp. [see Table 4]), and lizard’s tail (Saururus cernuus), as available.
After the wetland fills with water in the spring, wetland plugs or containerized plants of the same native
species will be planted on three foot centers (i.e., one plant for every nine square feet or approximately
4,840 plugs per acre).
Shallow Emergent Wetland – This wetland type will be planted identically to that of the Deep Water
Emergent Wetland. The same species mix will be utilized; however the expected species to establish will
include smartweed, water primrose, common rush, duck potato, ravenfoot sedge (Carex crus-corvi),
flatsedge (Cyperus spp.[see Table 4]), burrhead (Echinodorus spp. [see Table 4]), spikerush (Eleocharis spp.
[see Table 4]), and fimbry (Fimbristylis spp. [see Table 4]). Plug planting, at three foot centers, will occur
in the spring after the wetland is filled with water.
It is important to describe waters of the United States based on the functions and values they provide,
which identifies the quality of the water body. The functions of waters are briefly described as the
interactions between the physical, chemical, and biological components. Values are the benefits society
places on these functions. These functions and values are to be considered in the mitigation design to
ensure no net loss of these resources.
The functions/values of the mitigated wetlands include:
• reduced hydraulic energy – The wetland mitigation area will be constructed with a moderate
amount of sinuosity through the placement of the individual wetland areas; however, these
wetlands will only contain sheet flows that are not expected to have any erosive forces. The
creation of the mitigation area will provide large, wide areas that will allow the dissipation of the
sheet flow velocities, by maintaining a degree of site topography.
• storage, recharge, and supply of water – The mitigation area will provide additional storage
functions over the existing wetlands due to the size of the proposed depressions and the location
adjacent to the tributary system. Additionally, the vegetation structure within the mitigation areas
will aid in slowing the water velocities during large precipitation events. The existing wetlands
provide limited storage due to type (i.e., shallow depression). The proposed mitigation plan will
increase the storage of water, thereby increasing the recharge and supply of water.
• filtration of sediment and nutrients – Since the proposed planting plan would increase the
vegetative structure of wetland and slopes there would be an increase in the level of filtration of
sediments and nutrients provided by the mitigated wetland over the current conditions.
Additionally, wetland plants will be established that are adapted to increased nutrient uptake and
storage. It is anticipated that the smaller precipitation events will be completely stored within the
mitigation area, allowing herbaceous plants to uptake most of these nutrients.
• wildlife habitat – The mitigated wetlands will be vegetated to mimic naturally occurring water
features, which provide good food and cover for wildlife. Since the tract is not near any regional
aviation facilities, wildlife air-strike hazards would be minimal from this mitigation plan. The deep
emergent portions of the wetland mitigation areas will provide intermittent to perennial pools as
a water source for all animals; in addition to a potential food source for secondary consumer
wildlife.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 8 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Table 4. Species to be included on the
Wetland Planting List that Could Occur within Tarrant County
Scientific Name
Cyperus: Cyperus: Eleocharis: Polygonum:
Cyperus acuminatus Cyperus spectabilis Eleocharis radicans Polygonum convolvulus
Cyperus aggregatus Cyperus sphaerolepis Eleocharis reverchonii Polygonum glabrum
Cyperus articulatus Cyperus squarrosus Eleocharis rostellata Polygonum hydropiper
Cyperus bipartitus Cyperus strigosus Eleocharis tenuis Polygonum hydropiperoides
Cyperus cephalanthus Cyperus surinamensis Eleocharis tortilis Polygonum lacerum
Cyperus compressus Cyperus tetragonus Eleocharis tuberculosa Polygonum meisnerianum
Cyperus croceus Cyperus thyrsiflorus Eleocharis vivipara Polygonum punctatum
Cyperus cuspidatus Cyperus virens Eleocharis wolfii Polygonum ramosissimum
Cyperus digitatus Echinodorus: Equisetum: Polygonum robustius
Cyperus drummondii Echinodorus berteroi Equisetum ferrissii Polygonum sagittatum
Cyperus echinatus Echinodorus tenellus Equisetum hyemale Polygonum scandens
Cyperus elegans Eleocharis: Fimbristylis: Polygonum setaceum
Cyperus eragrostis Eleocharis acicularis Fimbristylis annua Polygonum striatulum
Cyperus erythrorhizos Eleocharis acutangula Fimbristylis autumnalis Polygonum tenue
Cyperus fendlerianus Eleocharis albida Fimbristylis caroliniana Polygonum virginianum
Cyperus flavescens Eleocharis atropurpurea Fimbristylis castanea Scirpus:
Cyperus flavicomus Eleocharis austrotexana Fimbristylis decipiens Scirpus atrovirens
Cyperus fugax Eleocharis baldwinii Fimbristylis dichotoma Scirpus cyperinus
Cyperus grayoides Eleocharis brachycarpa Fimbristylis littoralis Scirpus divaricatus
Cyperus haspan Eleocharis brittonii Fimbristylis puberula Scirpus georgianus
Cyperus hermaphroditus Eleocharis cancellata Fimbristylis tomentosa Scirpus pallidus
Cyperus hystricinus Eleocharis cellulosa Fimbristylis vahlii Scirpus pendulus
Cyperus laevigatus Eleocharis compressa Ludwigia:
Cyperus lancastriensis Eleocharis cylindrica Ludwigia alternifolia
Cyperus lanceolatus Eleocharis elongata Ludwigia glandulosa
Cyperus lentiginosus Eleocharis engelmannii Ludwigia grandiflora
Cyperus lupulinus Eleocharis equisetoides Ludwigia hirtella
Cyperus niger Eleocharis fallax Ludwigia leptocarpa
Cyperus ochraceus Eleocharis flavescens Ludwigia linearis
Cyperus odoratus Eleocharis geniculata Ludwigia microcarpa
Cyperus onerosus Eleocharis interstincta Ludwigia octovalvis
Cyperus oxylepis Eleocharis lanceolata Ludwigia palustris
Cyperus pallidicolor Eleocharis macrostachya Ludwigia peruviana
Cyperus plukenetii Eleocharis melanocarpa Ludwigia pilosa
Cyperus polystachyos Eleocharis microcarpa Ludwigia repens
Cyperus pseudovegetus Eleocharis minima Ludwigia sphaerocarpa
Cyperus reflexus Eleocharis montana Nymphaea:
Cyperus refractus Eleocharis montevidensis Nymphaea ampla
Cyperus retroflexus Eleocharis obtusa Nymphaea elegans
Cyperus retrofractus Eleocharis occulata Nymphaea odorata
Cyperus retrorsus Eleocharis olivacea Polygonum:
Cyperus schweinitzii Eleocharis palustris Polygonum amphibium
Cyperus seslerioides Eleocharis parvula Polygonum argyrocoleon
Cyperus setigerus Eleocharis quadrangulata Polygonum caespitosum
SWF-2010-00470 Page 9 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Generalized Maintenance Plan
Table 5 provides potential maintenance activities that could occur during the establishment period to
provide the vegetative plantings the highest potential for success. Once establishment has been achieved
and success criteria met, a long-term maintenance strategy and plan will be undertaken.
Generalized Site Protection Mechanisms
The City of Fort Worth, will dedicate in perpetuity , the mitigation areas (See Figures 3 and 4)as part of the
public parks and drainage systems by City resolution.
Table 5. Maintenance Strategies that could be Implemented
Strategy Description
nurse crops Established, if determined that the existing plant community provides excessive
competition for the successful establishment of the planted trees and shrubs. Nurse
crops that may be considered depend upon the area and time of the year, but may
only include non-invasive low growing species (i.e., wheat/oats, coastal Bermudagrass,
and native sod and bunchgrasses [e.g., buffalograss, sideoats grama, etc.], etc.).
soil preparation May require chisel plowing, disking, raking, and packing to have the appropriate
planting bed prior to planting the wetlands. This strategy may be necessary in areas
that are hard/dry soils or areas that there is grading necessary.
mulching Conducted in areas, as necessary, to provide ground cover. This ground cover will
provide protection against erosion, aid against opportunistic invasive species
colonization, and assist in maintaining soil moisture around plant materials. There are
many types of mulch, but only mulch that does not contain seed sources of invasive
species (i.e., Bermudagrass, Johnsongrass, etc.) will be used.
temporary irrigation May be established during drought conditions to aid in the seedling establishment.
Irrigation will be used on an as needed basis, depending upon the climatic and soil
conditions and conducted only in areas that have been planted. All irrigation pipe
and equipment will be removed upon establishment of the plant materials (i.e., when
the success criteria have been met).
fertilizer May be used to aid in establishing the plant materials. The appropriate ratios and
quantities of slow-release fertilizer will be determined in areas that appear to have
nutrient deficiencies.
herbicide Treatments to control exotic or invasive species will be conducted as spot treatments,
as necessary. Anticipated invasive species that will require treatment include, but are
not limited to, cattails, black willow, and Johnsongrass. Only herbicides labeled for
aquatic use will be used.
shredding May be utilized in areas to reduce herbaceous community competition with the
planted tree and shrubs. Once the trees become established, shredding will be
discontinued.
feral hog management Will be conducted to aid in the establishment of plant materials. Feral hogs will be
controlled through lethal and non-lethal means following all state wildlife regulations.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 10 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Generalized Performance Standards
The Permittee, and successors, will be responsible for maintaining the mitigation area in this plan until
such time as the Permittee provides documentation to and receives verification from the USACE, Fort
Worth District Regulatory Branch that:
• aquatic areas within the mitigation area meet the definition of a water of the United States under
the Regulatory Program regulations applicable at that time;
• aquatic areas within the mitigation area are functioning as the intended type of water of the
United States and at an acceptable level of ecological performance; and
• non-aquatic areas, such as buffer areas and riparian zones, within the mitigation area are
functioning as the intended type of ecosystem component and at an acceptable level of
ecological performance.
The success criteria for the establishment of woody species will be based on an average density calculated
by assessing the health of specified survey areas. To determine the survivorship for the woody species,
randomly placed 0.1-acre circular plots will be permanently established stratifying each segment’s riparian
enhancements tree and shrub planted mitigation (Table 6).
Table 6. Monitoring Plots or Transects by Segment
Segment No. Acres Mitigation Type
Circular
Plots
Point-Intercept
Transects
L1 1.97 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 2 2
L3 0.68 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 1 1
L4 1.66 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 2 2
L6 1.85 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 2 2
L7 2.49 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 3 3
U1 1.12 Wetlands 2 2
U1 7.09 Native Grasses 7
U2 0.04 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 1 1
This method has been proven a valid approach for vegetation sampling across numerous biological and
ecological fields, as well as, through valid statistical methodologies (Ott 1993 An Introduction to Statistical
Methods and Data Analysis; Creative Research Systems 2003, Statistical Sample Size Calculator). Within
each of these circular plots, each planted and volunteer woody stem will be assessed. Data (species and
status – alive or dead) will be recorded on data sheets for analysis and inclusion in the monitoring report.
Success will be measured based on density of live planted and other woody species (volunteers) native to
riparian corridors (i.e., American elm, cedar elm, hackberry, and Osage orange). A list of species that could
be counted toward the success criteria are detailed below (Table 7). Woody species that would be
considered invasive would not be included in the approved volunteer species list. No invasive species
would be counted toward the success criteria. An invasive species list as found in the Texas
Administrative Code, Chapter 19, is included as Table 8.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 11 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Table 7. Woody Species to be Counted Toward Success Criteria
Large Canopy Trees Small Trees and Shrubs
black walnut (Juglans nigra)
bitter pecan (Carya aquatica)
pecan (Carya illinoinensis)
bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa)
Shumard’s oak (Quercus shumardii)
American elm (Ulmus americana)
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
live oak (Quercus virginiana)
red mulberry (Morus rubra)
Osage orange (Maclura pomifera)
cedar elm (Ulmus crassifolia)
hackberry (Celtis laevigata)
chinkapin oak (Quercus muehlenbergii)
sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
slippery/winged elm (Ulmus alata)
box elder (Acer negundo)
• common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana)
• redbud (Cercis canadensis)
• coralberry (Symphoricarpos orbiculatus)
• Chickasaw plum (Prunus angustifolia)
• Mexican plum (Prunus mexicana)
• deciduous yaupon (Ilex decidua)
• buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)
• roughleaf dogwood (Cornus drummondii)
• hawthorne (Crataegus spathulata)
• hawthorne (Crataegus viridis)
• western soapberry
(Sapindus saponaria drummondii)
• Eve’s necklace (Styphnolobium affine)
Annual monitoring of the woody species will be conducted for a minimum of five years after the last
planting date, the success criteria is achieved, and/or the mitigation area is functioning as intended.
Monitoring will be conducted on a per segment basis (i.e. when one segment is completed, has achieved
all success criteria for five years, and the mitigation area is functioning as intended, the monitoring will be
completed for that segment). To meet the success criteria of this mitigation plan, there must be 109
woody stems living per acre within the mitigation area. These woody species would be divided into
approximately 75 percent trees either planted or volunteered from the approved list (90 individual trees)
and approximately 25 percent shrubs volunteered from the approved list (30 individual shrubs).
The success criteria for the native prairie grass plantings and herbaceous wetland plantings are based on
the ground cover and species composition. There are many plant inventory methods for documenting
these parameters; however, there is one specific methodology that was designed for this purpose – the
point intercept method (Forest Service 2006, Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-164-CD). The point intercept
method has been widely used within the range management profession for the purpose of documenting
rangeland health, stocking rates, and baseline plant inventories. Generally, this method is to document a
specified unit of land; one point-intercept line transect is documented for a unit of land with the same
characteristics (i.e., soils, slope, plant community, management, etc). If the transect is standardized (i.e.,
measurements at a defined increment), this approach will provide the interaction scale that is occurring at
the plant and inter-plant scale (i.e., percent cover or percent no cover). In order to characterize the plant
community across a landscape, multiple transects must be conducted to cross any potential landscape
scale. Therefore, the density of transects must not be smaller than the smallest patch size of plant
community, or variation of plant community (Herrick et al, 2005; Monitoring Manual for Grassland,
Shrubland and Savanna Ecosystems). Tall grass prairie typically does not have small landscape patch sizes;
these landscape patch sizes typically follow soils or range sites which are typically no smaller than 1 acre
in size (Brady 1990, The Nature and Properties of Soils).
SWF-2010-00470 Page 12 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Table 8. Invasive Species per the Texas Administrative Code 2005, effective 2007.
Scientific Name Noxious Common Name State Weed Status† U.S. Nativity*
Alhagi maurorum (Alhagi camelorum) camelthorn Noxious Plant I
Alternanthera philoxeroides alligatorweed Noxious Plant I
Arundo donax giant reed Noxious Plant I
Calystegia sepium hedge bindweed Noxious Plant NI
Cardiospermum halicacabum balloonvine Noxious Plant N
Cuscuta japonica Japanese dodder Noxious Plant I
Eichhornia azurea rooted waterhyacinth Noxious Plant I
Eichhornia crassipes waterhyacinth Noxious Plant I
Hydrilla verticillata hydrilla Noxious Plant I
Ipomoea aquatica water spinach Noxious Plant I
Lagarosiphon major lagarosiphon Noxious Plant XU
Lythrum salicaria purple loosestrife Noxious Plant I
Melaleuca quinquenervia paperbark Noxious Plant I
Myriophyllum spicatum Eurasian watermilfoil Noxious Plant I
Nassella trichotoma serrated tussock Noxious Plant I
Orobanche ramosa broomrape Noxious Plant I
Panicum repens torpedograss Noxious Plant I
Pistia stratiotes waterlettuce Noxious Plant N
Pueraria montana (Pueraria lobata) kudzu Noxious Plant, Invasive
Plant
I
Rottboellia cochinchinensis itchgrass Noxious Plant I
Salvinia salvinia Noxious Plant I
Schinus terebinthifolius Brazilian peppertree Noxious Plant I
Solanum viarum tropical soda apple Noxious Plant, Invasive
Plant
I
Spirodela oligorrhiza giant duckwee Noxious Plant N
Tamarix saltcedar Noxious Plant, Invasive
Plant
I
Triadica sebifera (Sapium sebiferum) Chinese tallow tree Noxious Plant, Invasive
Plant
I
Notes:
I = Introduced N = Native
I? = Probably Introduced NI = Native and Introduced
XU = Cultivated, or not in the United States
Source: Texas Administrative Code. 2005, amended effective 2007. Quarantines and noxious plants, Chapter 19 (25
May 2011). State of Texas.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 13 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
The herbaceous planted areas will be monitored through the use of the point intercept method on a 100-
meter line per 1 acre of herbaceous plantings (see Table 6). At each point, vegetation (or lack of
vegetation) will be recorded to calculate percent cover (i.e., number of points with vegetation divided by
100) and species composition. The native prairie grass area must exhibit 80 percent ground cover of
native prairie grass vegetation after five years or five years after the last remedial planting to meet the
success criteria. Similarly, the wetland mitigation areas must exhibit 80 percent ground cover of native
hydrophytic vegetation after five years or five years after the last remedial planting to meet the success
criteria. This area will be monitored annually from the date of planting until success criteria have been
achieved. Annual monitoring of the native prairie grass planting and wetland planting will be conducted
for at least five years after the last planting date, the success criteria have been achieved, and the
mitigation area is functioning as intended. Monitoring will be conducted on a per segment basis (i.e. when
one segment is completed, has achieved all success criteria for five years, and the mitigation area is
functioning as intended, the monitoring will be completed for that segment).
Generalized Monitoring Requirements
A monitoring program will help ensure the success of the proposed mitigation project. The program
identifies an ecological stage when the mitigation area is capable of functioning without any further
intervention. For the success of vegetation establishment, qualified mitigation specialists (or biologists)
will monitor the site on an annual basis until the success criteria are met. Detailed annual monitoring
reports will be submitted to the USACE summarizing the events of the mitigation project (i.e., additional
planting), mortality of any vegetation, and proposed future events to be conducted on the mitigation site
(i.e., any additional plantings). The Permittee will establish and implement a self-monitoring program that
includes the following actions:
• Designation, in writing, of a responsible party to coordinate with the USACE, Fort Worth District
Regulatory Branch concerning on-site inspections and compliance with permit conditions.
• Implementation of a reporting program that includes written compliance reports submitted
annually to the USACE beginning 01 October of the year the Individual Permit is acquired. Each
report will include any changes to the project schedule; a summary of the activities that occurred
during the reporting period; demonstration of the Permittee's compliance with the permit
conditions; documentation of the progress and/or completion of all authorized work, including
mitigation activities; and photographs, maps, and a description of the project’s impacts to waters
of the United States. Each report will also document whether disturbed areas, such as borrow
ditches, embankments, stream banks, road crossings, or temporary impact areas, are revegetating
adequately and not suffering erosion damage. Compliance reports will be submitted whether or
not any work has been conducted during the reporting period. Reports will be submitted until
the USACE verifies that the Permittee has successfully completed all compensatory mitigation
plan requirements, the mitigation area has met the performance standards and planting success
criteria included in the plan, and all authorized construction activities have been either completed
or deleted from the project.
• The Permittee will be the responsible party through construction completion. Prior to
construction, the Permittee/Responsible Party will contract a qualified mitigation specialist
(wetland ecologist/biologist) to oversee construction and other activities to the extent necessary
to ensure compliance with all mitigation requirements of this permit. The mitigation specialist will
be contracted by the Permittee to provide oversight on the mitigation area until the success
criteria has been established. Upon establishing the success criteria, the long term management
and oversight of the mitigation area will be provided by the property owner. This mitigation plan
will be provided to the new Responsible Party in the event that the mitigation area’s responsible
SWF-2010-00470 Page 14 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
party changes. During the transition, the mitigation specialist will also meet with the new
Responsible Party to describe the mitigation area’s intended functions and the approved
maintenance activities that are allowed. The mitigation specialist will provide a letter to the
USACE documenting this meeting and contact information of the new Responsible Party. This
letter will include a statement and signature from the new Responsible Party indicating they have
been informed of the conditions of this permit and the requirements associated with the
mitigation plan.
Long Term Management Plan
Long-term operation and management includes the oversight of the mitigation area after success criteria
are established so that the intended functions continue. The primary responsibility will involve that the
overall functions and values of these aquatic features will continue to establish. This duty will generally be
limited to ensuring that the openings of the wetlands/valley storage areas are unobstructed so that the
water levels do not increase (i.e., through beaver impoundments) and the overall vegetation is not harmed
through anthropomorphic and animal disturbances.
The mitigation area will not be maintained after the success criteria have been established. The only
maintenance activities that will be allowed in the these areas after success criteria has been established
includes removal of any hazard trees, periodic trash removal, and control of exotic and native ecologically
invasive plant species (see Tables 7 and 8, upland invasive species [e.g., honey mesquite and eastern red
cedar], early successional invasive trees [e.g., black willow and cottonwood], and any exotic invasive
species [e.g., Chinese ligustrum and Chinaberry]), if such species compromise the success of the planted
vegetation. Hazard trees include those that are dead and are subject to falling onto adjacent properties
resulting in damage to real property. These hazard trees may be removed; no other maintenance
activities are allowed in the process of removing these trees (i.e., cutting live trees, shrubs, or vines). There
will be no grading, excavation, or discharging of materials into the mitigation area after success criteria
has been established. No mowing, shredding, cutting, or herbicides are allowed within the mitigation
area. During the establishment period of the mitigation areas, strategic mowing or selective/spot
herbicides will be allowed to remove any competition to the native planted vegetation. To delineate the
mitigation areas from the surrounding area, signs indicating the presence of the area and the non-mow
conditions will be placed along the boundary. The signs will have language that indicates the area is a
wetland and stream mitigation area and that no mowing can occur.
Adaptive Management Plan
Since success of the mitigation area is dependent on vegetative survivorship, monitoring will continue
until the appropriate success criteria have been met. If the appropriate survivorship or density for the
woody species (109 living woody stems per acre from the approved list of species) is not established, then
supplemental plantings and additional monitoring will be performed until the success criterion is
achieved. If the herbaceous cover (80 percent ground cover of native prairie grass species or emergent
wetland species) is not established, supplemental plantings and additional monitoring will be performed
until the success criterion is achieved.
Financial Assurances
The City of Fort Worth will ensure that the mitigation efforts are conducted with the construction activities
through a performance bond required of the construction contractor once a construction contract it let.
Construction activities will only occur once the City of Fort Worth has sufficient finding to complete a
balanced set of segments.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 15 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
This page intentionally left blank
SWF-2010-00470 Page 16 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
PART IV: SEGMENT DESCRIPTIONS
Table 9 summarizes the segments of the project for both Upper (U1 through U9) and Lower (L1 through
L7) Lebow along with segment station numbers, length of existing stream, and the length and area of
impacts. Table 10 summarizes the Texas Rapid Assessment Method (TxRAM) condition scores for the
existing conditions along the entire length of each segment, as well as an existing conditional equivalent
length for the proposed impacted length of each segment. The conditional equivalent length of existing
segment avoided is not included within the calculations; as those conditions would not be altered by the
proposed project. Table 11 summarizes the proposed conditions of each segment, the conditional
equivalent length for the impacted length, and the difference in conditional equivalent length indicating
either a net environmental benefit from the activities or a net loss. The TxRAM data forms and
photographs are included in Attachments J-2 and J-3, respectively. Additionally, a brief description and
photograph are provided for the existing conditions of each stream segment. As mentioned previously,
construction activities would be sequenced in such a way as to combine segment construction activities to
create a net environmental benefit. Overall, this project creates a net benefit of 2,323.8 conditionally
equivalent linear feet of stream.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 17 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Table 9. Segment Descriptions, Length of Stream, and Length and Area of Impact
Segment Description Station SAR Priority
Length of
Existing
Stream
(feet)
Length of
Impact
(feet)
Area of
Impact
(acres)
L1
Stream Restoration: Downstream of
Brennan Ave.
9+00 to
26+6.13 1 5 1,823 813 0.39
L2 Brennan Ave. Roadway Crossing
26+0613 to
26+78.26 1 1 71 71 0.11
L3
Stream Restoration: Brennan Ave. to 28th
St.
26+78.26 to
28+93 and
40+00 to
46+68.79
1 6 853 224 0.11
2 6 859 388 0.09
3 6 323 323 0.02
L4
SH 183 (28th Street) Bridge Crossing (Prior
NWP 14)
46+68.79 to
47+69.79
101 0 0
Stream Restoration: 28th St. to Dewey St.
47+69.79 to
60+13.81
1 9 161 161 0.03
2 9 1,229 1,229 0.20
L5
Dewey St. Roadway Crossing (Prior NWP
14)
60+13.81 to
60+62.69 1 2 51 0.00
L6
Stream Restoration: Dewey Street to
Schwartz Ave.
60+62.62 to
89.00
1 12 1,383 492 0.13
2 12 1,262 552 0.06
3 12 315 315 0.14
L7
Stream Restoration: Schwartz Ave. to
Diamond St.
90+00 to
102+70
1 15 1,293 1,293 0.37
2 15 61 0 0.00
T2 Tributary 2
3 684 684 0.06
LA Long Avenue (No Impacts)
102+70 to
109+96.11
631 0 0.00
U1 Upper Lebow Storm Water Detention
109+96.11
to123+22.92
1 3 988 987 0.27
2 3 433 433 0.09
U2
36th Street Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
123+22.92 to
126+16.13 1 4 200 200 0.05
U3
Beaumont St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
126+16.13 to
137+13.11 1 7 1,092 1092 0.31
U4
Jasper St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
137+13.11 to
144+14.46 1 8 701 701 0.20
U5
Terminal Rd. Roadway Crossing &
Upstream and Downstream Chanel
144+14.46 to
157+50
1 10 783 783 0.17
2 10 506 506 0.09
U6
Weber St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
157+50 to
158+79.27 1 11 173 173 0.05
U7
Hardy St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
158+79.27 to
166+48.34 1 13 768 768 0.18
U8 Channel from Decatur Ave. to Hardy St.
166+48.34 to
174+21.62 1 15 770 770 0.15
U9
DeRidder Ave. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
174+21.62 to
184+51.42 1 16 1,037 1037 0.17
Total 18,639 13,997 3.43
SWF-2010-00470 Page 18 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Table 10. Segment Descriptions, Length of Impacted
Stream, Existing TxRAM Condition Score, and Existing Conditional Equivalent Length
Segment Description Station SAR
Length of
Impact
(feet)
TxRAM
Existing
Condition
Score
Existing
Conditional
Equivalent
(feet)
Combined
Existing
Conditional
Equivalent
(feet)
L1
Stream Restoration: Downstream
of Brennan Ave.
9+00 to
26+6.13 1 813 41.7 339.0 339.0
L2 Brennan Ave. Roadway Crossing
26+0613 to
26+78.26 1 71 17.6 12.5 12.5
L3
Stream Restoration: Brennan Ave.
to 28th St.
26+78.26 to
28+93 and
40+00 to
46+68.79
1 224 32.5 72.8
223.9
2 388 29.2 113.3
3 323 11.7 37.8
L4
SH 183 (28th Street) Bridge
Crossing (Prior NWP 14)
46+68.79 to
47+69.79
0
Stream Restoration: 28th St. to
Dewey St.
47+69.79 to
60+13.81
1 161 10.8 17.4
517.6 2 1,229 40.7 500.2
L5
Dewey St. Roadway Crossing
(Prior NWP 14)
60+13.81 to
60+62.69
L6
Stream Restoration: Dewey Street
to Schwartz Ave.
60+62.62 to
89.00
1 492 40.5 200.1
551.5
2 552 43.3 239.0
3 315 35.7 112.5
L7
Stream Restoration: Schwartz
Ave. to Diamond St.
90+00 to
102+70
1 1,293 44.8 579.3
579.3 2 0 18.0 0.0
T2 Tributary 2 684 29.2 199.7 199.7
LA Long Avenue (No Impacts)
102+70 to
109+96.11
U1
Upper Lebow Storm Water
Detention
109+96.11
to123+22.92
1 988 25.1 247.7
425.7 2 433 41.1 178.0
U2
36th Street Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
123+22.92 to
126+16.13 1 200 30.8 61.6 61.6
U3
Beaumont St. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
126+16.13 to
137+13.11 1 1,092 52.1 568.9 568.9
U4
Jasper St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
137+13.11 to
144+14.46 1 701 56.8 398.2 398.2
U5
Terminal Rd. Roadway Crossing &
Upstream and Downstream
Chanel
144+14.46 to
157+50
1 783 57.8 452.6
635.2 2 506 36.1 182.7
U6
Weber St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
157+50 tp
158+79.27 1 173 36.8 63.7 63.7
U7
Hardy St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
158+79.27 to
166+48.34 1 768 35.2 270.3 270.3
U8
Channel from Decatur Ave. to
Hardy St.
166+48.34 to
174+21.62 1 770 54.7 421.2 421.2
U9
DeRidder Ave. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
174+21.62 to
184+51.42 1 1,037 50.2 520.6 520.6
Total 13,997
SWF-2010-00470 Page 19 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Table 11. Segment Descriptions, Length of Impacted Stream, Proposed TxRAM Condition
Score, Proposed Conditional Equivalent Length, and Conditional Equivalent Length Balance
Segment Description Station SAR
Improved
Channel
Mitigation
Length (feet)
TxRAM
Proposed
Condition
Score
Proposed
Conditional
Equivalent
(feet)
Conditional
Equivalent
Difference
(feet)
L1
Stream Restoration: Downstream
of Brennan Ave.
9+00 to
26+6.13 1 565.0 66.5 375.7 36.7
L2 Brennan Ave. Roadway Crossing
26+0613 to
26+78.26 1 70.0 17.6 12.3 -0.2
L3
Stream Restoration: Brennan Ave.
to 28th St.
26+78.26 to
28+93 and
40+00 to
46+68.79
1
566.0 66.5 369.7 152.5
2
3
L4
SH 183 (28th Street) Bridge
Crossing (Prior NWP 14)
46+68.79 to
47+69.79
1241
66.5
0.0
825.3
307.7
Stream Restoration: 28th St. to
Dewey St.
47+69.79 to
60+13.81
1
2
L5
Dewey St. Roadway Crossing
(Prior NWP 14)
60+13.81 to
60+62.69 1 0 0 0.0 0.0
L6
Stream Restoration: Dewey Street
to Schwartz Ave.
60+62.62 to
89.00
1
2365.0 62.3 1473.4 921.9
2
3
L7
Stream Restoration: Schwartz
Ave. to Diamond St.
90+00 to
102+70
1
1261.0 66.9 843.6 264.3 2
T2 Tributary 2 627.0 57.5 360.5 160.8
LA Long Avenue (No Impacts)
102+70 to
109+96.11
U1
Upper Lebow Storm Water
Detention
109+96.11
to123+22.92
1
1,412.0 61.1 862.7 437.0 2
U2
36th Street Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
123+22.92 to
126+16.13 1 201.0 46.0 92.5 30.9
U3
Beaumont St. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
126+16.13 to
137+13.11 1 1,096.0 46.6 510.7 -58.2
U4
Jasper St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
137+13.11 to
144+14.46 1 700.0 46.6 326.2 -72.0
U5
Terminal Rd. Roadway Crossing &
Upstream and Downstream
Chanel
144+14.46 to
157+50
1
1,290.0 46.6 601.1 -34.1 2
U6
Weber St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
157+50 tp
158+79.27 1 173.0 46.6 80.6 17.0
U7
Hardy St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
158+79.27 to
166+48.34 1 768.0 46.1 354.0 83.7
U8
Channel from Decatur Ave. to
Hardy St.
166+48.34 to
174+21.62 1 770.0 46.1 355.0 -66.2
U9
DeRidder Ave. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
174+21.62 to
184+51.42 1 1,033.0 42.9 443.2 -77.4
Total 14,138.0
2,104.4
SWF-2010-00470 Page 20 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment L1
Existing Conditions
Segment L1 was a riparian channel located in a highly
urbanized area. The channel had incised banks that
were currently eroding. The average active erosion
for both banks was approximately 45 percent. The
riparian buffer was highly impacted by the
surrounding urbanization including commercial and
industrial developments. The area has a mixed forest
canopy cover of between 40 to 45 percent. The
dominate species in the segment were American elm,
green ash, black willow, Japanese privet (Ligustrum
japonicum), honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Chinese
privet, and Bermudagrass. The riparian corridor
provided some in-stream habitat including overhanging vegetation and wood/leafy debris. During the
site visit there was some surface flow present along with some pooled water with the water cover
approximately 25 to 50 present of the channel bottom.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 1,823 linear feet of stream, of which, 813 will be impacted by channel activities and
replanted with the proposed vegetation. The existing TxRAM score for the entire length was 41.7,
indicating that of proposed 813 feet of impacted channel was the equivalent of 339 feet of channel. The
proposed conditions and mitigation activities would increase the TxRAM score to 66.5 on the improved
length of 565 linear feet or 375.7 equivalent length of channel, a surplus of 36.7 equivalent feet, indicating
a net benefit to the environment.
• Stations 9+00 to 10+80: excavate and grade overbank on right bank to remove restriction of flow
at the constriction point (Sheet 8, Attachment J-4);
• Station 14+50 to 20+4: excavate and grade overbank on left bank to remove restriction of flow at
the constriction point (Sheets 9 and 10, Attachment J-4);
• Station 14+50 to 24+60: lowering the flowline of creek between two to three feet in depth to
accommodate Segment L2 and reducing floodplain width. Proposed flowline will be graded to
have a 0.34 percent grade. Channel ecological floodplain varies from 15 feet near southern
terminus (ties into natural channel) to near 55 feet wide. Banks vary in height between 10 and 16
feet tall, but will be graded to have a 4:1 slope (Sheets 10 and 11, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation and Monitoring Activities
The proposed mitigation activities within this segment include 1.97 total acres of riparian enhancements
and native grass plantings following the generalized criteria established above. This would include
planting, at minimum, approximately 215 stems of woody species (161 trees and 54 shrubs) and 59
pounds of native grass seed mix. Monitoring activities would include two 0.1-acre circular plots and two
100-meter point-line intercept transects monitored every year for five years or five years from the last
remedial plantings or until success criteria (109 living stems per acre of woody species and 80 percent
ground cover of native herbaceous vegetation) is achieved and the mitigation area is functioning as
intended.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 21 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment L2
Existing Conditions
Segment L2 was a bridge crossing. This segment
was channelized with culverts and the left bank was
stabilized with concrete. This segment is located at
the entrance and parking lot of Trail Drivers Park.
Due to the culverts, the channel included a large
amount of sedimentation. The riparian buffer in
this segment was limited due to the road and
parking lot located adjacent to the left bank. The
right bank has a small mixed forest buffer that was
also highly influenced by the adjacent urbanization.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 71 linear feet of stream, all of which will be impacted by bridge replacement
activities. The existing TxRAM score for the entire length was 17.6, indicating the equivalent of 12.5 feet
of channel. The replacement activities will slightly increase the length of channel.
• Station 24+60 to 28+93: reconstruct Brennan Avenue bridge culvert. Removes four 10 by 7-foot
box culverts and replaces with four 10 by 8-foot culverts and two 12 by 10-foot box culverts. The
two larger culverts will be placed in the center to accommodate the pilot channel flows; thereby,
allowing normal flows in the pilot channel through the culverts. The culverts will be realigned
along the gradient of the overall stream to reduce bank erosion at the downstream channel
banks. As a result, approximately 385 linear feet of the existing channel will be filled and re-
aligned. The flowline will be excavated three feet to accommodate the two larger culverts. The
flowline upstream of Brennan Avenue will be graded at a 0.6 percent slope to a three foot gabion
drop-structure. To reduce erosion at the drop-structure, a gabion mattress (one foot thick) will be
installed for approximately 30 feet downstream, which will extend up the slopes of the banks.
(Sheets 11 and 12, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
No mitigation actions are proposed within this segment of the Lebow Channel since this will only include
the bridge replacement.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 22 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment L3
Existing Conditions
Due to the length of Segment L3, it was divided into
three Stream Assessment Reaches (SAR) to determine
the existing conditions using TxRAM. The first SAR
extends approximately 853 feet upstream from
Brennan Avenue within Trail Drivers Park. This SAR
had highly incised banks that were actively eroding.
The riparian corridor associated with this reach
included the park vegetation within Trail Drivers Park.
This area contains 20 to 40 percent mixed species
cover. The second SAR was approximately 859 feet
in-stream. The main difference between this reach
and L3-1 was the lack of observed water or stream
flow. The dominant vegetation within these two SAR
was green ash, bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa), Canada
wildrye, box elder (Acer negundo), Japanese privet,
and Bermudagrass. The third SAR was the concrete-
lined section of this segment. This SAR has been
armored with a concrete channel and concrete banks
limiting the functional quality of this SAR.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within
this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design
located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 2,035 linear feet of stream, of
which, 935 will be impacted by channel activities and
replanted with the proposed vegetation. The proposed conditions and mitigation activities would create
an improved stream length of 566 linear feet with an equivalent length of channel of 376.4, a surplus of
152.5 equivalent feet, indicating a net benefit to the environment.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 23 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
• Station 28+93 to 40+40: No grading work to be completed (Sheets 12 through 14, Attachment
D)
• Station 40+40 to 46+50: lowering flowline of creek between one to four feet in depth to
accommodate creek re-alignment and remove flooding off of Decatur Avenue. Proposed flowline
will be graded to have a 0.50 percent grade. There will be approximately 518 linear feet of
channel filled as it is being realigned to the east, away from Decatur Avenue. Channel ecological
floodplain varies from 25 to 45 feet wide. Banks vary in height between four to 13 feet tall, but
will be graded to have a 4:1 slope. A low flow/pilot channel will be graded into the bottom of the
ecological floodplain. (Sheets 14 and 15, Attachment J-4)
• Station 46+50 to 48+50: 28th Street Bridge – completed under separate project (Sheets 15 and
16, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
The proposed mitigation activities within this segment include 0.68 total acres of riparian enhancements
and native grass plantings following the generalized criteria established above. This would include
planting, at minimum, approximately 74 stems of woody species (56 trees and 19 shrubs) and 20 pounds
of native grass seed mix. Monitoring activities would include one 0.1-acre circular plots and one 100-
meter point-line intercept transects monitored every year for five years or five years from the last remedial
plantings or until success criteria (109 living stems per acre of woody species and 80 percent ground
cover of native herbaceous vegetation) is achieved and the mitigation area is functioning as intended.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 24 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment L4
Existing Conditions
Due to the length of Segment L4, it was divided into two
SAR to determine the existing conditions using TxRAM.
The first SAR was limited by the artificial rock that was
used to armor the banks of the channel along 28th Street
(State Highway 183). The 28th Street bridge
replacement was completed under a Nationwide Permit
14 without a PCN as detailed in a Categorical Exclusion
performed by the Fort Worth District office of the Texas
Department of Transportation (TxDOT) approved in
September 2008. This SAR also did not have any
observed water flow or standing water. The second SAR
was located adjacent to Decatur Avenue limiting the
riparian corridor. The banks were also actively eroding with an average of 70 percent erosion. The
canopy cover of the riparian area was high, approximately 60 to 70 percent, but the area was highly
impacted by the adjacent urban activities. The riparian community was dominated by species including
greenbrier, cedar elm (Ulmus crassifolia), Japanese privet, Bermudagrass, sugar hackberry, Chinese privet,
Osage orange, and Chinaberry (Melia azedarach). The riparian corridor provided some in-stream habitat
including overhanging vegetation and wood/leafy debris. During the site visit there was some surface flow
present along with some pooled water with the water cover approximately 25 to 50 present of the
channel bottom.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within
this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design
located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 1,390 linear feet of stream, of
which, 1,390 will be impacted by channel activities
and replanted with the proposed vegetation. The
existing TxRAM score for the entire length was 40.7,
indicating that the proposed 1,390 feet of impacted
channel was the equivalent of 517.6 feet of channel.
The proposed conditions and mitigation activities of
the improved channel length of 1,241 linear feet
would increase the TxRAM score to 66.5 or 825.3 equivalent length of channel, a surplus of 307.7
equivalent feet, indicating a net benefit to the environment.
• Station to 48+50 to 59+00: lowering flowline of creek between two to five feet in depth to
accommodate creek re-alignment and remove flooding off of Decatur Avenue. Proposed flowline
will be graded to have a 0.50 percent grade. The existing channel within this entire reach will be
filled, approximately 1,050 linear feet; to accommodate the channel that will be realigned to the
east, away from Decatur Avenue. Channel ecological floodplain varies from 25 to 35 feet wide.
Banks vary in height between 7 and 15 feet tall, but will be graded to have a 4:1 slope. There will
be a 3-foot drop-structure located at Station 53+49 with corresponding gabion mattresses along
SWF-2010-00470 Page 25 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
slopes and 45 feet downstream of the structure. This drop-structure allows for the subtle channel
gradient and lowering the 100-year water surface elevation in Segment L5 and L3. A low
flow/pilot channel will be graded into the bottom of the ecological floodplain. (Sheets 16
through 18, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
The proposed mitigation activities within this segment include 1.66 total acres of riparian enhancements
and native grass plantings following the generalized criteria established above. This would include
planting, at minimum, approximately 181 stems of woody species (136 trees and 45 shrubs) and 50
pounds of native grass seed mix. Monitoring activities would include two 0.1-acre circular plots and two
100-meter point-line intercept transects monitored every year for five years or five years from the last
remedial plantings or until success criteria (109 living stems per acre of woody species and 80 percent
ground cover of native herbaceous vegetation) is achieved and the mitigation area is functioning as
intended.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 26 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment L5
Existing Conditions
Segment L5 was a bridge crossing of Dewy Street,
which is being completed under a separate
Nationwide Permit 14 for linear transportation
projects. This segment was channelized with large
culverts. The entire section was armored with
concrete. There was a high amount of sediment
deposited along the concrete channel. Due to the
urbanized nature of this segment there was no
riparian buffer or in-stream habitat. The segment did
have a continual pool of water that covered 75
percent of the channel bottom. This segment is being included to determine the cumulative impacts from
the entire suite of projects being conducted in the general Lebow Chanel Drainage area.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 27 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
This page intentionally left blank
SWF-2010-00470 Page 28 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment L6
Existing Conditions
Due to the length of Segment L6, it was divided into
three SAR to determine the existing conditions using
TxRAM. The first SAR began north of Dewy Avenue
and continues 1,383 feet upstream. This SAR had
moderately incised banks with high erosion potential.
Over 80 percent of this SAR was eroded to bedrock
with some boulders and gravel within the substrate.
The canopy cover of the riparian area was
approximately 50 to 60 percent but the area was
highly impacted by the adjacent urban activities. The
riparian community was dominated by species
including green ash, cedar elm, Japanese privet,
Bermudagrass, sugar hackberry, and Chinese privet.
The riparian corridor provided some in-stream habitat including overhanging vegetation, rootwads, and
wood/leafy debris. Other in-stream habitats included undercut banks and boulders/cobbles. During the
site visit there was surface flow present along with pooled water with the water covering approximately 25
to 50 present of the channel bottom. Much of the second SAR was similar to SAR L6-1. The main
difference was the substrate composition was
dominated by less bedrock and included a composite
of sand, gravel, cobble, and boulders. The
improvement in this section was the canopy cover
was greater, including the species mentioned above
and honeysuckle and box elder. The last SAR was
located adjacent to Schwartz Avenue. There was a
high amount of sediment located within this SAR
from the culverts at Schwartz Avenue. This area was
dominated by herbaceous species with limited tree
canopy cover, with species including Bermudagrass,
cattails (Typha latifolia), green ash, and sugar
hackberry.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 29 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 2,960 linear feet of stream within the three SAR, of which, 1,361 will be impacted by
channel activities and replanted with the proposed vegetation. The existing TxRAM score indicated that
the proposed 1,361 feet of impacted channel was the equivalent of 551.5 feet of channel. The proposed
conditions and mitigation activities of the improved stream length of 2,365.0 linear feet would increase
the TxRAM score to 62.3 with the equivalent length of channel of 1,473.4, a surplus of 921.9 equivalent
feet, indicating a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 61+50 to 65+50: This reach will be re-aligned and the flowline will be excavated to
reduce flooding of Decatur Avenue and allow the 100-year water surface to convey under Dewey
Street bridge. This segment contains a 7-foot drop structure at Station 63+20 that will have a
gabion mattress extending 50 feet downstream from the drop structure. Upstream of the drop
structure, the flowline will be graded at a 1.08 percent slope, but downstream the flowline will be
0.63 percent. There will be 300 linear feet of existing creek filled to re-align the channel and the
remaining 100 feet in this segment will be excavated. Banks vary in height between 11 and 15
feet tall, but will be graded to have a 4:1 slope. (Sheets 18 and 19, Attachment J-4)
• Station 65+50 to 71+80: Existing 630 linear feet of channel will remain, no work will be
conducted. (Sheets 19 and 20, Attachment J-4)
• Dewey Bypass Channel at Station 1+00 to 6+50: This is an 550 linear feet overflow channel that
allows for the natural channel to remain in place with no channel modifications. The natural
channel will not be dewatered as there will be a two foot tall weir preventing water from entering
the bypass channel. Due to the decreased length, the flowline slope is between 1.11 and 0.98
percent. In addition to this increased flowline slope, there is a 5-foot drop structure proposed at
station 3+33. Gabion mattress is proposed for 20 downstream of the drop structure, in addition
to the upstream and slopes around the structure. The ecological floodplain of this channel will be
approximately 30 feet wide. Banks vary in height between six to 12 feet tall, but will be graded to
have a 4:1 slope. This bypass channel will result in the removal of one structure. Dadge (Sheets
21 and 22, Attachment J-4)
• Station 71+80 to 77+00: excavate and grade overbank on left bank to remove restriction of flow
at the constriction point. The left bank will be excavated to two feet above the existing flowline.
This will create an ecological floodplain on one side of the channel that is between 85 and 120
feet from the channel. The left bank will then be five feet tall graded at a 4:1 slope. To create this
ecological floodplain, a structure will have to be purchased and demolished. (Sheets 23 and 24,
Attachment J-4)
• Station 77+00 to 83+50: Existing 650 linear feet of channel will remain, no work will be
conducted. (Sheets 24 and 25, Attachment J-4)
• Vera Cruz Bypass Channel at Station 1+00 to 8+00: This is a 700 linear feet overflow channel that
allows for the natural channel to remain in place with no channel modifications. The channel
flowline varies in slope between 1.48 and 1.00 percent. The bypass channel follows the Vera Cruz
road alignment, which will be removed as a result of this project. The ecological floodplain will be
20 feet, bordered by 4:1 sloped channel banks that vary in height between five to 11 feet tall.
(Sheets 26 and 27, Attachment J-4)
SWF-2010-00470 Page 30 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
• Station 83+50 to 84+00: Existing Vera Cruz culvert will be removed and channel banks will be
graded back to a 4:1 slope. Channel bottom will be graded to 20 to 25 feet wide. (Sheet 25,
Attachment J-4)
• Station 84+00 to 87+50: Channel banks will be widened to allow for an ecological floodplain that
varies between 80 to 90 feet wide. Channel banks will be graded at 4:1 slopes with the bank
heights between five to 12 feet tall. The channel flowline will slope approximately 1.32 percent,
and there will be a meandering low-flow channel throughout the ecological floodplain. The
existing channel will be filled or excavated through the entire segment. (Sheets 27 and 28,
Attachment J-4)
• Station 87+50 to 89+00: Sediment has accumulated within the channel bottom which will be
removed. A low flow channel will be excavated within the bottom of the channel. (Sheet 28,
Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
The proposed mitigation activities within this segment include 1.85 total acres of riparian enhancements
and native grass plantings following the generalized criteria established above. This would include
planting, at minimum, approximately 202 stems of woody species (151 trees and 50 shrubs) and 56
pounds of native grass seed mix. Monitoring activities would include two 0.1-acre circular plots and two
100-meter point-line intercept transects monitored every year for five years or five years from the last
remedial plantings or until success criteria (109 living stems per acre of woody species and 80 percent
ground cover of native herbaceous vegetation) is achieved and the mitigation area is functioning as
intended.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 31 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
This page intentionally left blank
SWF-2010-00470 Page 32 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment L7
Existing Conditions
Due to the length of Segment L7, it was divided into
two SAR to determine the existing conditions using
TxRAM. The first SAR extends approximately 1,293 feet
upstream from Schwartz Avenue. This SAR had highly
incised banks that were actively eroding. The riparian
corridor associated with this reach included a small
forested area. This area contains 35 to 50 percent
mixed species cover. Dominate species in the segment
were hackberry, red mulberry (Morus rubra), green ash,
box elder, Osage orange, honeysuckle, Bermudagrass,
and Canada wildrye. During the site visit there was
observed water over 25 to 50 percent of the channel
bottom. The second SAR was the concrete-lined section of this segment. This SAR has been armored with
a concrete channel and concrete banks limiting the functional quality of this SAR.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within
this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design
located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 1,354 linear feet of stream in
two SAR, of which, 1,293 will be impacted by channel
activities and replanted with the proposed vegetation.
The existing TxRAM score for the entire length
indicated that the proposed 1,293 feet of impacted
channel was the equivalent of 579.3 feet of channel.
The proposed conditions and mitigation activities of
the improved stream length of 1,261.0 linear feet
would increase the TxRAM score to 66.9 with the equivalent length of channel of 843.6, a surplus of 264.3
equivalent feet, indicating a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 89+65 to 91+75: The channel flowline will be lowered and the left bank will be excavated
and graded. The channel flowline will be lowered between one to two feet and graded to a 0.87
percent slope. The left bank will be excavated to provide up to 65 feet of ecological floodplain.
The left bank will approximately five feet tall and graded at a 4:1 slope. (Sheets 28 and 29,
Attachment J-4)
• Station 97+75 to 98+36: The channel will be excavated and the overbanks widened. The channel
flowline will be lowered approximately one foot and graded to a 0.50 percent slope. Oscar Road
and an alley will be removed and the channel profile will be continuous. The left channel banks
will be graded to stable 4:1 slopes; both banks will be graded to a 4:1 slope varying in height
between four to eight feet tall. The channel bottom will vary between 20 to 40 feet wide. The
right bank will excavated to provide an ecological floodplain up to 55 feet in width. The existing
channel bottom will provide the channel alignment. (Sheets 29 and 30, Attachment J-4)
SWF-2010-00470 Page 33 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
• Station 98+36 and 102+70: The channel flowline will be lowered and the right bank will be
excavated and graded. The channel flowline will be lowered approximately one foot and graded
to a 0.50 percent slope. The right bank will be excavated to provide up to 30 feet of ecological
floodplain. The right bank will between five to nine feet tall and graded at a 4:1 slope. (Sheets 30
and 31, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
The proposed mitigation activities within this segment include 2.48 total acres of riparian enhancements
and native grass plantings following the generalized criteria established above. This would include
planting, at minimum, approximately 270 stems of woody species (203 trees and 68 shrubs) and 74
pounds of native grass seed mix. Monitoring activities would include three 0.1-acre circular plots and
three 100-meter point-line intercept transects monitored every year for five years or five years from the
last remedial plantings or until success criteria (109 living stems per acre of woody species and 80 percent
ground cover of native herbaceous vegetation) is achieved and the mitigation area is functioning as
intended.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 34 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U1
Existing Conditions
Due to the channel material of Segment U1, it was
divided into two SAR to determine the existing
conditions using TxRAM. The first SAR extends
approximately 982 feet upstream from Long Avenue.
This SAR was concrete-lined with concrete banks.
Above the concrete banks there was a small urban
forested area. This area contains 70 percent mixed
species cover. Dominant species in the segment were
hackberry, green ash, honey mesquite (Prosopis
glandulosa), and Bermudagrass. During the site visit
there was observed water over 25 to 50 percent of the
channel bottom. The second SAR was approximately
419 feet. This section had incised banks with limited
active erosion. This section also had a small urban
forest associated with the banks along with herbaceous cover associated with the adjacent school. In
addition to streams, Segment U1 contained 0.54 acre of forested wetland.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this
segment at the specific station numbers include the
following with reference to the schematic design
located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan. This
segment contains 1.415 linear feet of intermittent
stream in two SAR, and 684 linear feet of ephemeral
stream all of which will be impacted by channel
activities and vegetation plantings. The existing TxRAM
score for the entire length was the equivalent of 425.7
feet of intermittent channel and 199.7 of ephemeral
channel. The proposed conditions and mitigation
activities would increase the TxRAM score for the
intermittent channel to 61.1 and for the ephemeral channel to 57.5. The improved stream length of 1,412
linear feet of intermittent channel and 627 linear feet of ephemeral channel, would be the equivalent of
862.7 linear feet of intermittent channel (437.0 linear feet surplus) and 360.5 linear feet of ephemeral
channel (160.8 linear feet surplus). Under the proposed conditions, the forested wetland would be
impacted in the construction of the detention pond and realignment of the channel. The TxRAM existing
wetland score was 58.3 or 0.31 acre conditional equivalent. Under the proposed conditions, a 1.12 acre
wetland complex would be created with a TxRAM score of 67.9 or the equivalent of 0.76 acre. Overall, the
construction of the detention area would result in a net benefit to the environment.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 35 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
• Station 109+97 to 117+97: Widen stream bottom, excavate flowline, and create detention in area
around the channel. Channel flowline will be graded between 0.42 to 0.85 percent slopes. The
channel bottom will be graded between 30 to 68 feet wide. A meandering low flow channel will
be graded in the channel bottom. (Sheet 32 through 34, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
The proposed mitigation activities within this segment include 1.12 acres of wetlands (0.35 acre of deep
emergent wetland and 0.77 acre of shallow emergent wetland) and 7.09 acres of native grass plantings
within the proposed detention area following the generalized criteria established above. This would
include planting, at minimum, 5,421 wetland plugs, 12 pounds of wetland seed mix, and 213 pounds of
native grass seed mix. Monitoring activities would include two 100-meter point-line intercept transects in
the wetlands and seven 100-meter point-line intercept transects in the native grass areas monitored every
year for five years or five years from the last remedial plantings or until success criteria (80 percent ground
cover of native herbaceous vegetation) is achieved and the mitigation area is functioning as intended.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 36 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U2
Existing Conditions
Segment U2 was a concrete lined section of the
channel with concrete banks. Above the banks, the
area was highly urbanized with residential properties.
There was limited vegetation within this segment,
primarily dominated by urban landscaping including
Bermudagrass with some tree species such as sugar
hackberry.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within
this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design
located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan. This segment contains 200 linear feet of stream, all of
which will be impacted by channel activities and replanted with the proposed vegetation. The existing
TxRAM score for the entire length was 30.8, indicating that the equivalent of 61.6 feet of channel. The
proposed conditions and mitigation activities of the improved channel length of 201 linear feet would
increase the TxRAM score to 46.0 or 92.5 equivalent length of channel, a surplus of 30.9 equivalent feet,
indicating a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 109+96.11 to 125+56.90: Widen stream bottom, excavate flowline, and create detention
in area around the channel. Channel flowline will be graded between 0.42 to 0.85 percent slopes.
The channel bottom will be graded between 30 to 68 feet wide. A meandering low flow channel
will be graded in the channel bottom. (Sheets 32 through 35, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
The proposed mitigation activities within this segment include 0.04 total acres of riparian enhancements
and native grass plantings following the generalized criteria established above. This would include
planting, at minimum, four trees and two pounds of native seed mix. Monitoring activities would include
one 0.1-acre circular plots and one 100-meter point-line intercept transects monitored every year for five
years or five years from the last remedial plantings or until success criteria (109 living stems per acre of
woody species and 80 percent ground cover of native herbaceous vegetation) is achieved and the
mitigation area is functioning as intended.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 37 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U3
Existing Conditions
This segment of the channel was approximately 1,092
feet extending upstream from 36th Street. The
segment has deep incised channel banks with 80 to
90 percent active erosion. This segment had a
limited riparian corridor consisting of mostly urban
area. The stream substrate composition was
dominated by gravel and cobble. There was
noticeable surface flow present at the time of the
survey with 50 to 75 percent of the channel bottom
covered with water.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 1,092 linear feet of stream, all of which will be impacted by channel activities and
mitigated through activities along other parts of the channel. The existing TxRAM score for the entire
length was 52.1, indicating that the equivalent of 568.9 feet of channel. The proposed conditions would
decrease the TxRAM score to 46.6 or 510.7 equivalent length of channel, a loss of 58.2 equivalent feet,
indicating a net loss to the environment. To compensate for this loss, construction activities on this
segment would occur concurrently or after a segment that compensates for the loss within this segment;
therefore, having a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 137+00 to 126+28.14: Current box culverts will be replaced with three 15 by 10-foot box
culverts. The current flowline will be graded to 0.59 percent slope. The walls of the channel will
be lined with gabions approximately 13 feet above the flowline on the left bank and
approximately 10 feet above the flowline on the right bank. (Sheets 35 through 37, Attachment
J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
Due to the activities proposed and the adjacent land uses, there would be no opportunity for on-site
mitigation within this segment. Overall, the proposed project activities would increase the amount of
water contained within the bottom of the channel and would limit erosive forces through bank armoring.
These activities in this highly urbanized segment would reduce the overall floodplain and reduce the
number of structures inundated by high flows. This segment would not be self-mitigating; therefore, to
balance the environmental effects, mitigation that provides an overall net benefit would be conducted in
another segment of the Lebow Channel Drainage area.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 38 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U4
Existing Conditions
This segment of the channel was approximately 701 feet
extending upstream from Beaumont Street. The
segment has deep incised channel banks with 60 to 90
percent active erosion. This segment had a limited
riparian corridor consisting of mostly urban area. The
stream substrate composition was dominated by gravel
and cobble. There was noticeable surface flow present
at the time of the survey with 75 percent of the channel
bottom covered with water.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 701 linear feet of stream, all of which will be impacted by channel activities and
mitigated through activities along other parts of the channel. The existing TxRAM score for the entire
length was 56.8, indicating that the equivalent of 398.2 feet of channel. The proposed conditions would
decrease the TxRAM score to 46.6 or 326.2 equivalent length of channel, a loss of 72.0 equivalent feet,
indicating a net loss to the environment. To compensate for this loss, construction activities on this
segment would occur concurrently or after a segment that compensates for the loss within this segment;
therefore, having a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 144+00 to 137+20.57: Current box culverts will be replaced with three 15 by 10-foot box
culverts. The current flowline will be graded to 0.60 percent slope. The walls of the channel will
be lined with gabions approximately 13 feet above the flowline. (Sheets 37 and 38, Attachment
J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
Due to the activities proposed and the adjacent land uses, there would be no opportunity for on-site
mitigation within this segment. Overall, the proposed project activities would increase the amount of
water contained within the bottom of the channel and would limit erosive forces through bank armoring.
These activities in this highly urbanized segment would reduce the overall floodplain and reduce the
number of structures inundated by high flows. This segment would not be self-mitigating; therefore, to
balance the environmental effects, mitigation that provides an overall net benefit would be conducted in
another segment of the Lebow Channel Drainage area.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 39 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U5
Existing Conditions
Due to the channel material of Segment U5, it was
divided into two SAR to determine the existing
conditions using TxRAM. The first SAR extends
approximately 783 feet upstream from Jasper Street.
The segment has incised channel banks with 80 to 90
percent active erosion. This segment had a limited
riparian corridor consisting of mostly urban area. The
stream substrate composition was dominated by
gravel and cobble. There was noticeable surface flow
present at the time of the survey with 75 percent of
the channel bottom covered with water. The second
SAR was concrete lined and approximately 506 feet
long. Above the banks the adjacent properties were primarily developed urban areas with limited
vegetation.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 1,289 linear feet of stream in two SAR, all of which will be impacted by channel
activities and mitigated through activities along other parts of the channel. The existing TxRAM score for
indicated that the equivalent feet of channel was 635.2. The proposed conditions would decrease the
TxRAM score and the equivalent length of channel to 601.1, a loss of 34.1 equivalent feet, indicating a net
loss to the environment. To compensate for this loss, construction activities on this segment would occur
concurrently or after a segment that compensates for the loss within this segment; therefore, having a net
benefit to the environment.
• Station 153+48.73 to 144+14.46: Current box culverts will be replaced with four 10 by 9-foot box
culverts. The current flowline will be graded to 0.56 percent slope. A gabion drop structure is
proposed at approximately 20 feet north of Jasper Street where the flowline will be lowered to
0.61 percent slope. The walls of the channel will be lined with gabions approximately 13 feet
above the flowline. At station 147+61.51 the right bank gabion wall will be lower to
approximately 10 feet above the flowline. (Sheets 38 through 40, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
Due to the activities proposed and the adjacent land uses, there would be no opportunity for on-site
mitigation within this segment. Overall, the proposed project activities would increase the amount of
water contained within the bottom of the channel and would limit erosive forces through bank armoring.
These activities in this highly urbanized segment would reduce the overall floodplain and reduce the
number of structures inundated by high flows. This segment would not be self-mitigating; therefore, to
balance the environmental effects, mitigation that provides an overall net benefit would be conducted in
another segment of the Lebow Channel Drainage area.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 40 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U6
Existing Conditions
This segment of the channel was approximately 173
feet extending downstream from Weber Street. The
segment had deep incised channel banks with 70 to
80 percent active erosion. This segment had a
limited riparian corridor consisting of both urban
forest and urban landscaping. The stream substrate
composition was dominated by cobble and bedrock.
There was noticeable surface flow present at the time
of the survey with 25 to 50 percent of the channel
bottom covered with water.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 173 linear feet of stream, all of which will be impacted by channel activities. The
existing TxRAM score for the entire length was 36.8, indicating that the equivalent of 63.7 feet of channel.
The proposed conditions would increase the TxRAM score to 46.6 or 80.6 equivalent length of channel, a
surplus of 17.0 equivalent feet, indicating a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 158+79.27 to 153+48.73: Current box culverts will be replaced with three 10 by 9-foot
box culverts. The current flowline will be graded to 0.65 percent slope. A gabion drop structure is
proposed at approximately 25 feet north of Terminal Road where the flowline will be lowered to
0.59 percent slope. The walls of the channel will be lined with gabions approximately 11 feet
above the flowline. (Sheets 40 and 41, Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
Due to the activities proposed and the adjacent land uses, there would be no opportunity for on-site
mitigation within this segment. Overall, the proposed project activities would increase the amount of
water contained within the bottom of the channel and would limit erosive forces through bank armoring.
These activities in this highly urbanized segment would reduce the overall floodplain and reduce the
number of structures inundated by high flows. Overall, this segment would be self-mitigating and provide
an overall net benefit.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 41 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U7
Existing Conditions
This segment of the channel was approximately
768 feet extending upstream from Weber Street.
The segment had deep incised channel banks with
50 to 90 percent active erosion. This segment had
a limited riparian corridor consisting of both urban
forest and urban landscaping. The stream
substrate composition was dominated by cobble
and bedrock. There was noticeable surface flow
present at the time of the survey with 25 to 50
percent of the channel bottom covered with
water.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 768 linear feet of stream, all of which will be impacted by channel activities. The
existing TxRAM score for the entire length was 35.2, indicating that the equivalent of 270.3 feet of
channel. The proposed conditions would increase the TxRAM score to 46.1 or 354 equivalent length of
channel, a surplus of 83.7 equivalent feet, indicating a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 166+48.34 to 159+79.27: Current box culverts will be replaced with three 10 by 9-foot
box culverts. The current flowline will be graded to 0.68 percent slope. The walls of the channel
will be lined with gabions approximately 10 feet above the flowline. (Sheets 41 and 42,
Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
Due to the activities proposed and the adjacent land uses, there would be no opportunity for on-site
mitigation within this segment. Overall, the proposed project activities would increase the amount of
water contained within the bottom of the channel and would limit erosive forces through bank armoring.
These activities in this highly urbanized segment would reduce the overall floodplain and reduce the
number of structures inundated by high flows. Overall, this segment would be self-mitigating and provide
an overall net benefit.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 42 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U8
Existing Conditions
This segment of the channel was approximately 770
feet extending upstream from Hardy Street. The
segment had incised channel banks with 50 to 70
percent active erosion. This segment had a limited
riparian corridor consisting of both urban forest and
urban landscaping. The stream substrate
composition was dominated by cobble and gravel.
There was noticeable surface flow present at the
time of the survey with 50 to 75 percent of the
channel bottom covered with water.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 770 linear feet of stream, all of which will be impacted by channel activities and
mitigated through activities along other parts of the channel. The existing TxRAM score for the entire
length was 54.7, indicating that the equivalent of 421.2 feet of channel. The proposed conditions would
increase the TxRAM score to 46.1 or 355.0 equivalent length of channel, a loss of 66.2 equivalent feet,
indicating a net loss to the environment. To compensate for this loss, construction activities on this
segment would occur concurrently or after a segment that compensates for the loss within this segment;
therefore, having a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 173+59.78 to 166+48.34: The sediment located in the existing box culverts under De
Ridder Avenue will be removed to restore the conveyance under the road. The current flowline
will be graded to 0.89 percent slope from Decatur Avenue to a grade break at Station 170+08.23.
After the grade break, the flowline will be graded to 0.58 percent slope. The walls of the channel
will be lined with gabions approximately 10 feet above the flowline. (Sheets 42 and 43,
Attachment J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
Due to the activities proposed and the adjacent land uses, there would be no opportunity for on-site
mitigation within this segment. Overall, the proposed project activities would increase the amount of
water contained within the bottom of the channel and would limit erosive forces through bank armoring.
These activities in this highly urbanized segment would reduce the overall floodplain and reduce the
number of structures inundated by high flows. This segment would not be self-mitigating; therefore, to
balance the environmental effects, mitigation that provides an overall net benefit would be conducted in
another segment of the Lebow Channel Drainage area.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 43 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
Segment U9
Existing Conditions
This segment of the channel was approximately 1,037
feet extending upstream from Decatur Avenue. The
segment had deep incised channel banks with 50 to
70 percent active erosion. This segment had a limited
riparian corridor consisting of mostly urban areas and
urban landscaping. The stream substrate composition
was dominated by cobble and gravel. There was
noticeable surface flow present at the time of the
survey with 50 to 75 percent of the channel bottom
covered with water.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed activities that will be occurring within this segment at the specific station numbers include
the following with reference to the schematic design located in Attachment J-4 of this mitigation plan.
This segment contains 1,037 linear feet of stream, all of which will be impacted by channel activities and
mitigated through activities along other parts of the channel. The existing TxRAM score for the entire
length was 50.2, indicating that the equivalent of 520.6 feet of channel. The proposed conditions would
decrease the TxRAM score to 42.9 or 443.2 equivalent length of channel, a loss of 77.4 equivalent feet,
indicating a net loss to the environment. To compensate for this loss, construction activities on this
segment would occur concurrently or after a segment that compensates for the loss within this segment;
therefore, having a net benefit to the environment.
• Station 183+39.98 to 174+21.62: Current box culverts under De Ridder Avenue will be replaced
with three 10 by 9-foot box culverts. The current flowline will be graded to 0.49 percent slope
from De Ridder Avenue to a grade break at Station 176+83.24. After the grade break the flowline
will be graded to 0.90 percent slope. The walls of the channel will be lined with gabions
approximately 11 feet above the flowline. (Sheets 44 and 45, Attachment J-4)
• Station 184+51.42 to 183+39.98: The current flowline will be graded to 0.95 percent slope. The
walls of the channel will be lined with gabions between 11 and 14 feet above the flowline on the
left bank and approximately 11 feet above the flowline on the right bank. (Sheet 45, Attachment
J-4)
Proposed Mitigation Activities
Due to the activities proposed and the adjacent land uses, there would be no opportunity for on-site
mitigation within this segment. Overall, the proposed project activities would increase the amount of
water contained within the bottom of the channel and would limit erosive forces through bank armoring.
These activities in this highly urbanized segment would reduce the overall floodplain and reduce the
number of structures inundated by high flows. This segment would not be self-mitigating; therefore, to
balance the environmental effects, mitigation that provides an overall net benefit would be conducted in
another segment of the Lebow Channel Drainage area.
SWF-2010-00470 Page 44 of 44
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
SWF-2010-00470
ATTACHMENT J-1
FIGURES
0 3,000 6,0001,500 Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: ESRI 10 Streetmap North America
Figure 1
General Location Map
Mount OlivetCemetery
Fort WorthFort WorthMeacham InternationalMeacham InternationalAirportAirport Little Fossil CreekMarine Creek Lebow St
N E 2 2 n d S t
Bruce StNE 3 1 s t S t
Watauga Ct WWatauga Ct ESchadt CtWisteria CtD i a m o n d
R d
Pap
urt Dr
N E 3 2 n d S t
M o rn in g
G lo ry A ve
N E 3 4 th S t
N E 3 5 t h S t
N W 2 7 t h S t
E E x c h a n g e
A v e Hardy StKe
lli Ct
Perry StN o r th g l e n D r Mapleleaf StOakhurst Scenic DrC o r n i n g Av e
M i neol a St
D e R id d e r S t
C ardinal LnN E 2 3 r d S t Quentin CtN E 3 7 th S t
N Jones StSmilax AveI v e y S t
N E 3 0 t h S t
L e m i n g S t
S o u th e rn S tN W 29th
S t
S e l m a
S tFontaine StK i m b o
R dBethlehem StD ix ie S t Zwolle StBluebonnet DrR e p p e r
S t
Dooling StGuent
her AveN W 2 6 t h
S t
N W 2 5 t h
S t
N W 2 4 t h
S t
N W 2 3 r d
S t
Ve r a
C r u z S t
P r i m r o s e
A v e
O x f o r d S t
A s t e r A v e
G l e n d o r a
S t
G e m i n i
P k y
Cold Springs RdChesser Boyer RdPackers StMoore AveNiles City BlvdStrohl StMark Iv PkyMercantile Plaza DrEv a S t
D u n d e e A v e
N E 3 3 rd S tN Commerce StN E 2 9 t h S tN Terry StN Elm StN Nichols StN Crump StN Harding StHale AveN E 2 1 s t S t
S t o c k y a r d s
B l v d
Industrial DrC a r n a t i o n
A v e
St
N Hays StSamuel
s AveBer ner St
N Houston StS el ene St
M a y d e l l S t
M ic h a e l S t
N o r m an S t
Peak StS a l i s b u r y A v e
Warfield StFalcon WayGlendale AveH o n e y s u c k l e
Av eRay Simon DrParsons Ln
H ig h
C r e s t Av e
M a r i g o l d A v e
B r u c e
A v eDeen RdG o l d e n r o d A v e
W L o tu s
A v e
Altamont Dr
D e R id d e r Av e
NE 3 8 t h S t
Schadt StE L o r a in e S t
Ellis AveD a is y L nHutchinson StLulu StBraswell DrElaine Pl
N E 3 6 t h S t
Grace AveN Grove StN Calhoun StCra
btr
e
e
S
t
I r i o n A v e Premier StOscar AveNeches StWeber StD e w e y S t Grover AveRunnels StD o w n i n g D r
N Pecan StBrennan AveN Hampton StJ a s p e r S t
B e a u m o n t S t
Wataug a R dSchwartz AveDecatur AveBusiness 287Sylvania AveL on g Av e
E L o n g A v e
E Northside
D
r
T e r m i n a l R dBlue Mound RdN Sylvania AveDeen RdST183
¨§¦35W
Limits of Project Improvements
1 inch = 1,750 feet
T a r r a n t
T a r r a n t
C o u n t y
C o u n t y
ST183
ST121ST199
£¤347
£¤377
£¤287
¨§¦30
¨§¦35W
¨§¦820
Fort WorthFort Worth
SaginawSaginaw
Map Extent
0 2,500 5,0001,250 Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 5/26/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Figure 2
Segment Locations
L1
L2
L3
L4
L6
L5
L7
U1
U2
U3
U4
U6 U5
U7U8
U9
E L o n g A v e
W L o n g A v e Blue Mound RdDeen RdTe r m i n a l R d
ST183
¨§¦35W
Segment Divisions
Limits of Project Improvements
1 inch = 1,600 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 8/10/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Figure 3a
Lower Lebow Planting Areas
L1
L2
L3
L4
L6
L5
L7
PeakCold SpringsGuenthe
r SterlingLuluNicholsHardySchwartzDiamond
StrohlDecaturDeenVera Cruz
183
Brennan
Neal
29Th
PerryOscarDundee
Oxford Ramp
GlendaleIrion
Dewey
GroverRay SimonQuentinMoore28Th
ChesterMaloneGlendoraAlley
33Rd
WeberLoraine
Watauga
LemingHutchinson32Nd
Ohio
Salisbury
Warwick
Warfield31St
30Th
Southern
SchadtRunnelsHamptonHardingCrumpHaysHaleNilesCityOn-Site Planting Areas
Riparian Area Enhancements
Urban Landscaping
Limits of Project Improvements
Segment Divisions
1 inch = 800 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
Ü
State: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 8/10/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Figure 3b
Lower Lebow Mitigation Areas
L1
L2
L3
L4
L6
L5
L7
PeakCold SpringsGuenthe
r SterlingLuluNicholsHardySchwartzDiamond
StrohlDecaturDeenVera Cruz
183
Brennan
Neal
29Th
PerryOscarDundee
Oxford Ramp
GlendaleIrion
Dewey
GroverRay SimonQuentinMoore28Th
ChesterMaloneGlendoraAlley
33Rd
WeberLoraine
Watauga
LemingHutchinson32Nd
Ohio
Salisbury
Warwick
Warfield31St
30Th
Southern
SchadtRunnelsHamptonHardingCrumpHaysHaleNilesCityLimits of Project Improvements
Segment Divisions
On-Site Compensatory Mitigation Areas
Riparian Area Enhancements
Stream Channel Improvements
1 inch = 800 feet
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 8/10/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Figure 4a
Upper Lebow
Planting Areas
U1
U2
U3
U4
U6
U5
U7U8
U9
37Th
38Th
LongDeen33RdSchwar
t
z Runnels
RampOscar
RaySimonDe Ridder
SchadtWeberDecaturLebowEva
Terminal
HamptonElain
e
Ne
ch
es
Driveway
LuluDixie ZwolleRepperStrohl
CrumpNicholsHarding35Th
Brothers
Michael
FontaineNorman
JasperHardy
Selene Grover36Th
Beaumont
Pars
o
n
s
Alta
m
o
n
t
Downing
34Th
Maydell
1 inch = 800 feet
On-Site Planting Areas
Riparian Area Enhancements
Native Grass Plantings
Deep Emergent Wetland
Shallow Emergent Wetland
Urban Landscaping
Limits of Project Improvements
Segment Divisions
0 1,500 3,000750Feet
ÜState: Texas
County: Tarrant
USACE Project # SWF-2010-00470
Date Map Created: 8/10/2011
Source: 2008 USDA FSA TOP Aerial
Photography; ESRI 10 Streetmap NA
Figure 4b
Upper Lebow
Mitigation Areas
U1
U2
U3
U4
U6
U5
U7U8
U9
37Th
38Th
LongDeen33RdSchwar
t
z Runnels
RampOscar
RaySimonDe Ridder
SchadtWeberDecaturLebowEva
Terminal
HamptonElain
e
Ne
ch
es
Driveway
LuluDixie ZwolleRepperStrohl
CrumpNicholsHarding35Th
Brothers
Michael
FontaineNorman
JasperHardy
Selene Grover36Th
Beaumont
Pars
o
n
s
Alta
m
o
n
t
Downing
34Th
Maydell
1 inch = 800 feet
On-Site Compensatory Mitigation Areas
Deep Emergent Wetland
Native Grass Plantings
Riparian Area Enhancements
Shallow Emergent Wetland
Stream Channel Improvements
Limits of Project Improvements
Segment Divisions
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
SWF-2010-00470
ATTACHMENT J-2
EXISTING TxRAM DATA FORMS
PROPOSED TxRAM DATA FORMS
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L1 1 1,820 4/12/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 1-2
Urbanized
30 5
21 0.5
21 0.1
Segment L1 is located in a urbanized watershed.
2
50 40 45
1
4
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60.5
Forest
Maintained grass
40 Mix High 1 50 .5
0 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
Forest
Maintained grass
45 Mix High 1 50 .5
0 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
10 25 25
20 10 10
4
✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔
✔✔
✔✔✔
3122121210
1.6 2
2
2
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L1 1 1,820 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 1-2
Urbanized
Segment L1 is located in an urbanized watershed
30 5
21 0.5
21 0.1
2
1
4
11.7
0.5
0.5 2.5
4
2 15
2
2 12.5
41.7
0
41.7
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L2 1 64 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 3-4
Bridge culvert
50 0
10 0.1
36 0.05
Segment L2 is a bridge crossing with culverts.
1
05025
Concrete on left bank
0
2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
82
Urban Area 0 None Intense 0 100 0
0
Forest
Urban Area
20 Mix High 1 50 .5
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.5
515 5 50
20 5 0
2
000
0 0
1
1
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L2 1 64 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 3-4
Urbanized
Segment L2 is a bridge crossing with culverts.
50 5
10 0.1
36 0.05
1
0
2
5
0
0.5 1.3
2
0 5
1
1 6.3
17.6
0
17.6
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L3 1 865 4/12/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 5-6
Urbanized
35 5
11 0.5
22 0.1
Segment L3 was located within Trail Drivers Park
2
60 0 32.5
One side is concrete lined
0
4
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
61
Park Forest
Maintained grass
40 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0
Park Forest
Road
20 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0
30 10 0
20 20 10
3
01
0.5 1
2
2
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L3 1 865 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 5-6
Urbanized
Segment L3 was located within Trail Drivers Park
35 5
11 0.5
22 0.1
2
0
4
10
0
0 0
3
1 10
2
2 12.5
32.5
0
32.5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L3 2 857 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 7-8
Urbanized
35 6
0 0
29 0
2
95 90 92.5
1
4
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
64.5
Park landscape 20 Mix Intense 0 100 0
0
Park landscape
Building/Road
30 Mix Intense 0 90 0
0 None Intense 0 10 0
0
10 50 0 0
20 10 0 10
5
✔✔✔ ✔
✔✔
✔✔
✔✔✔
22111123
1.6 2
0
0
✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L3 2 857 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 7-8
Urbanized
Segment L3 was located within Trail Drivers Park
35 6
00
29 0
2
1
4
11.7
0
0 0
5
2 17.5
0
0 0
29.2
0
29.2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L3 3 323 4/12/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 9-10
Urbanized
50 10
0 0
36 0
This segment is concrete lined and also contains bridge crossing.
2
000
Concrete lined banks
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
68
Concrete banks
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 40 0
Buildings/Road
10 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0 None Intense 0 10 0
0
Concrete Banks
Building/Road
0 None Intense 0 40 0
0 None Intense 0 60 0
0
00 0 100
00 0
0
0000
0 0
0
0
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L3 3 323 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 9-10
Urbanized
This segment is concrete lined and also contains bridge crossing.
50 10
00
36 0
2
0
5
11.7
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0
11.7
0
11.7
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L4 1 57 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 11
Urbanized
35 10
0 0
15 0
This segment is armored with rock, adjacent to the bridge crossing.
2
000
Armored with rocks
0
4
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
Rock banks
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 30 0
Buildings/Road
10 Mix High 1 20 0.2
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.2
Rock Banks
Building/Road
0 None Intense 0 30 0
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 60 0
0 Mix High 1 10 0.1
0.1
10 10 60
10 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L4 1 57 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 11
Urbanized
This segment is armored with rock, adjacent to the bridge crossing.
50 10
00
36 0
2
0
4
10
0.2
0.1 0.8
0
0 0
0
0 0
10.8
0
10.8
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L4 2 1320 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 12-14
Urbanized
30 5
15 0.2
20 0
2
75 65 70
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60
Forest
Urban Area
70 Mix High 2 75 1.5
0 None Intense 0 25 0
1.5
Forest
Building/Roads
60 Mix High 1 45 0.45
0 None Intense 0 55 0
0.45
10 20
10 10 50
3
✔✔✔✔✔
✔✔✔✔
✔✔
1111111111110
0.9 1
2
2
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L4 2 1,320 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 12-14
Urbanized
30 5
15 0.2
20 0
2
1
5
13.3
1.5
0.45 4.9
3
1 10
2
2 12.5
40.7
0
40.7
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L5 1 74 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 15
Bridge culvert
20 6
20 1
20 1
Segment L5 is a bridge crossing with culverts.
1
000
Concrete
0
2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60
Urban Area 0 None Intense 0 100 0
0
Urban Area 0 None Intense 0 100 0
0
00 0 100
00 0
0
0
0 0
3
3
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L5 1 74 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 15
Urbanized
Segment L5 is a bridge crossing with culverts.
20 6
20 1
20 1
1
0
2
5
0
0 0
0
0 0
3
3 18.8
23.8
0
23.8
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L6 1 1320 4/12/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 16-17
Urbanized
35 5
15 0.1
25 0
3
50 70 60
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
62.5
Forest
Urban Area
50 Mix High 1 50 0.5
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.5
Forest
Building/Roads
60 Mix High 1 70 0.7
0 None Intense 0 30 0
0.7
10
10 80
2
✔✔
✔✔✔✔✔✔✔
✔✔✔✔
✔✔
2121211112110
1.2 2
2
2
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L6 1 1,320 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 16-17
Urbanized
35 5
15 0.1
25 0
3
1
5
15
0.5
0.7 3
2
2 10
2
2 12.5
40.5
0
40.5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L6 2 1,320 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 18-19
Urbanized
30 5
15 0.3
20 0
2
50 50 50
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60
Forest
Urban Area
70 Mix High 2 50 1
0 None Intense 0 50 0
1
Forest
Urban Area
70 Mix High 2 50 1
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 40 0
0 Mix Intense 0 10 0
1
10 15
15 10 50
3
✔✔
✔✔✔✔✔✔✔
✔✔✔✔
✔✔
2121211112110
1.2 2
2
2
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L6 2 1,320 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 18-19
Urbanized
30 5
15 0.3
20 0
2
1
5
13.3
1
1 5
3
2 12.5
2
2 12.5
43.3
0
43.3
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L6 3 362 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 20-21
Urbanized
70 10
15 0.1
35 0
3
30 30 30
2
2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
67.5
Herbaceous cover
Urban Area
10 Mix High 1 75 0.75
0 None Intense 0 25 0
0.75
Herbaceous cover
Urban Area
35 Mix High 1 90 0.9
0 None Intense 0 10 0
0.9
010 75
510 0
2
✔
✔
111
1 1
2
2
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L6 3 362 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 20-21
Urbanized
70 10
15 0.1
35 0
3
2
2
11.6
0.75
0.9 4.1
2
1 7.5
2
2 12.5
35.7
0
35.7
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L7 1 1320 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 22-23
Urbanized
30 6
20 0.2
20 0.1
2
70 85 77.5
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60
Forest
Urban Area
50 Mix High 1 40 0.4
Urban Landscape
0 None Intense 0 25 0
0 Mix Intense 0 35 0
0.4
Forest
Urban Area
35 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban landscape
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0.2
10 35 10
25 10 10
5
✔✔
✔
✔✔
✔
✔✔
21121111
1.25 2
2
2
✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L7 1 1,320 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 22-23
Urbanized
30 6
20 0.2
20 0.1
2
1
5
13.3
0.4
0.2 1.5
5
2 17.5
2
2 12.5
44.8
0
44.8
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L7 2 90 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk and M Huff
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 24
Urbanized
35 6
10 0.01
31 0
This segment is concrete lined.
2
000
Concrete lined banks
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
65.5
Concrete banks
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 40 0
0 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0
Concrete Banks
Urban Area
0 None Intense 0 40 0
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0 Mix Intense 0 0 0
0
00 0 100
00 0
0
0
0 0
1
1
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L7 2 90 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 22-23
Urbanized
This segment is concrete lined.
35 6
10 0.1
31 0
2
0
5
11.7
0
0 0
0
0 0
1
1 6.3
18
0
18
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
Tributary 2 1 672 5/19/2011 K Kowalczyk
Ephemeral Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 46-47
Urbanized
20 4
0 0
5 0
3
20 20 20
3
4
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
27.5
Forest 40 Mix High 1 50 .5
.5
Forest 45 Mix High 1 50 .5
.5
10 25
65
2
✔✔✔✔✔
✔✔
✔✔
✔
212212
1.3 2
0
0
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
Tributary 2 1 672 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Ephemeral Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 46-47
Urbanized
20 4
00
50
3
3
4
16.7
.5
.5 2.5
2
2 10
0
0 0
29.2
0
29.2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U1 1 988 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 25-26
Urbanized
60 5
9 0.1
10 0.5
Segment U1 is a concrete lined channelized section of the project
2
000
Concrete
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
Forest
Concrete
70 Mix High 2 60 1.2
0 None Intense 0 40 0
1.2
Forest
Concrete
70 Mix High 2 20 0.4
Urban Landscaping
0 None Intense 0 30 0
0 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.4
100
0
0
1
2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U1 1 988 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 25-26
Urbanized
Segment U1 is a concrete lined channelized section of the project
60 5
90.1
10 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
1.2
0.4 4
0
0 0
1
2 9.4
25.1
0
25.1
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U1 2 419 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 27-28
Urbanized
40 6
6 0.1
15 0.5
2
10 10 10
large boulders
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
Forest
Large boulders
50 Mix High 1 45 0.45
Herbaceous cover
0 None Intense 0 10 0
0 Mix High 1 45 0.45
0.9
Herbacous cover
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
0 None Intense 0 40 0
0.6
530
5 60
2
✔
✔
1112
1.3 2
3
2
✔
✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U1 2 419 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 27-28
Urbanized
40 6
60.1
15 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.9
0.6 3.8
2
2 10
3
2 15.6
41.1
0
41.7
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U2 1 196 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 29-30
Urbanized
40 6
15 0.1
15 0.5
Concrete lined section of the channel.
2
Concrete
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
Forest
Urban landscaping
50 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.2
Forest
Urban Area
50 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0.2
100
0
✔
11
1 1
3
3
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U2 1 196 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 29-30
Urbanized
40 6
60.1
15 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.2
0.2 1
0
1 2.5
2
3 15.6
30.8
0
30.8
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U3 1 1,086 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 31-32
Urbanized
18 5
6 0.2
16 0.5
1
80 90 85
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
Forest
Urban landscaping
10 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.2
Forest
Urban Area
20 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0.2
10 40
40 10
5
✔✔
✔✔
✔✔✔
1121121111
1.2 2
4
3
✔✔
✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U3 1 1,086 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 31-32
Urbanized
18 5
60.2
16 0.5
1
1
5
11.7
0.2
0.2 1
5
2 17.5
4
3 21.9
53.9
0
53.9
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U4 1 700 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 33-34
Urbanized
20 8
12 0.3
15 0.5
2
60 90 75
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
Forest
Urban landscaping
20 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.2
Forest
Urban Area
50 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0.2
10 30
50 10
5
✔
✔
✔
1122
1.5 2
4
4
✔✔
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U4 1 700 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 33-34
Urbanized
20 8
12 0.3
15 0.5
2
1
5
13.3
0.2
0.2 1
5
2 17.5
4
4 25
56.8
0
56.8
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U5 1 799 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
25 5
12 0.5
15 0.5
2
80 90 85
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
Forest
Urban landscaping
80 Mix High 2 20 0.4
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.4
Forest
Urban Area
70 Mix High 2 20 0.4
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0.4
40
50 10
5
✔✔
✔✔
✔
✔
21221112
1.5 2
4
4
✔✔
✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U5 1 799 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 35-36
Urbanized
25 5
12 0.3
15 0.5
2
1
5
13.3
0.4
0.4 2
5
2 17.5
4
4 25
57.8
0
57.8
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U5 2 506 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 37
Urbanized
25 8
9 0.1
9 0.1
2
000
Concrete banks
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
Urban Area
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 70 0
5 Mix Intense 1 30 0
0
Urban landscaping
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0
100
0
✔
11101
0.8 1
4
3
✔
✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U5 2 506 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 37
Urbanized
25 8
90.1
90.1
2
0
5
11.7
0
0 0
0
1 2.5
4
3 21.9
36.1
0
36.1
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U6 1 167 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 38-39
Urbanized
60 10
5 1
10 0.5
2
70 80 75
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
Forest
Urban landscaping
10 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.2
Forest
Urban Area
50 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0.2
20 10
30 40
2
✔
✔
21
1.5 2
2
2
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U6 1 167 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 38-39
Urbanized
60 10
51
10 0.5
2
1
5
13.3
0.2
0.2 1
2
2 10
2
2 12.5
36.8
0
36.8
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U7 1 762 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 40-41
Urbanized
22 10
5 0.1
12 0.5
1
50 90 70
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
56
Forest
Urban landscaping
60 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None High 0 50 0
0.2
Forest
Urban Area
40 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0.2
10
40 50
2
✔✔
✔
✔
2122111
1.5 2
2
2
✔✔
✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U7 1 762 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 40-41
Urbanized
22 10
50.1
12 0.5
1
1
5
11.7
0.2
0.2 1
2
2 10
2
2 12.5
35.2
0
35.2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U8 1 728 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 42-43
Urbanized
20 10
8 0.1
10 0.7
2
50 70 60
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
Forest
Urban landscaping
60 Mix High 2 30 0.6
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None High 0 40 0
0.6
Forest
Urban Area
70 Mix High 2 10 0.2
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.2
20 30
30 10 10
5
✔✔
✔
✔
✔
2122121
1.5 2
4
3
✔✔
✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U8 1 728 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 42-43
Urbanized
20 10
80.1
10 0.5
2
1
5
13.3
0.6
0.2 2
5
2 17.5
4
3 21.9
54.7
0
54.7
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U9 1 902 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 44-45
Urbanized
20 14
10 0.5
10 1
2
50 70 60
1
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
Forest
Urban landscaping
40 Mix High 1 20 0.2
Urban Area
5 Mix Intense 0 30 0
0 None Intense 0 50 0
0.2
Forest
Urban Area
50 Mix High 1 10 0.1
Urban landscaping
0 None Intense 0 50 0
5 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.1
10 20 5
50 15
5
✔✔
✔
✔
✔✔
212212111
1.5 2
3
3
✔✔
✔✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U9 1 902 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 44-45
Urbanized
20 14
10 0.5
10 1
2
1
5
13.3
0.2
0.1 0.8
5
2 17.5
3
3 18.8
50.4
0
50.4
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
Page 1 of 2
TXRAM WETLAND DATA SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ____________________________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Wetland ID/Name: _____________ WAA No.: ____________ Size: _____________ Date: ________________ Evaluator(s):____________________
Wetland Type: ________________________ Ecoregion: _________________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
Aerial Photo Date and Source: ___________________________________ Site Photos: _________________________ Representative: Yes No
Notes:
LANDSCAPE
Connectivity – Confirm in office review. See figures in section 2.3.1.1 for examples.
Notes on any barriers or alterations that prevent connectivity: ___________________________________________________________
Aquatic resources within 1,000 feet of WAA to which wetland connects (including number for other considerations):_____Score: _____
Buffer – Evaluate to 500 feet from WAA boundary. Confirm in office review. See figures in section 2.3.1.2 for examples.
%XIIHU7\SH'HVFULSWLRQ 6FRUH 6HH1DUUDWLYHV 3HUFHQWDJH 6XEWRWDO
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Score: _____
HYDROLOGY
Water Source – Degree of natural or unnatural/artificial influence. Confirm in office review for watershed.
Natural:Precipitation Groundwater Overbank flow/stream discharge Overland flow Beaver activity Other: _______
Unnatural/Manipulated:Impoundment Outfall Irrigation/pumping Other artificial influence or control: _________________
Watershed: Development Irrigated agriculture Wastewater treatment plant Impoundment Other: _________________
Degree of artificial influence/control:Complete High Low None
Wetland created/restored/enhanced: Sustainable/replicates natural Controlled Score: _____
Hydroperiod – Variability and recent alteration of the duration, frequency, and magnitude of inundation/saturation.
Evaluate the hydroperiod including natural variation: __________________________________________________________________
Direct evidence of alteration: Natural: Log-jam Channel migration Other:________________________________________
Human: Diversions Ditches Levees Impoundments Other: ___________________________________________
Riverine only: Recent channel in-stability/dis-equilibrium (Degradation or Aggradation)
Indirect evidence of alteration:Wetland plant stress: ______________________Plant morphology: ______________________
Upland species encroachment: _________________ Plant Community: _________________Soil: _________________
Change/Alteration of hydroperiod: None Due to natural events Human influences (Slight or High)
Degree hydroperiod of wetland created/restored/enhanced replicates natural patterns: _______________________________________
Lacustrine fringe on human impoundment: High variability Low variability Recent changes to hydroperiod Score: _____
Hydrologic Flow – Movement of water to or from surrounding area and openness to water moving through the WAA.
Flow: Inlets: _____ Outlets: _____ Signs of water movement to or from WAA: _____________________________________
Restrictions: Levee Berm/dam Diversion Other: __________________________________________________________
High flowthrough: Floodplain Drift deposits Drainage patterns Sediment deposits Other: _______________________
Low flowthrough: High landscape position Stagnant water Closed contours Other: __________________Score: _____
SOILS
Organic Matter – Use data and indicators from wetland determination data form(s) based on applicable regional supplement.
High (organic soil or indicator A1, A2, A3)
Moderate (indicator A9, S1, F1 in AW or A9, S1, S2, F1 in GP or A6, A7, A9, S7, F13 in AGCP)
Low (indicated by thin organic or organic-mineral layer)None observable in surface layer as described herein Score: _____
Lebow
1 1 0.5 5/23/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Forested Cross Timbers
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
2 2
Forest 3250.75
Urban area 0700
Grassland 250.1
0.85
3
Highly developed area
2
11 Tributary entering and existing the wetland
4
2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
Page 2 of 2
Sedimentation – Deposition of excess sediment due to human actions. Confirm in office review for landscape.
Landscape with stress that could lead to excess sedimentation? Yes No Landscape position: High Low
Magnitude of recent runoff/flooding events: High Low Percent of WAA with excess sediment deposition: _____
Sand deposits: _____% of area, _____ average thickness Silt/Clay deposits: _____% of area, _____ average thickness
Lacustrine fringe only: Upper end of impoundment Degrades wetland Contributes to wetland processes Score: _____
Soil Modification – Physical changes by human activities. Confirm in office review for past.
Type (Check those applicable and circle R for recent or P for past): Farming R/P Logging R/P Mining R/P Filling R/P
Grading R/P Dredging R/P Off-road vehicles R/P Other R/P: ____________________________________________
Percent of WAA with recent soil modification: _____% Degree of modification:High Low
Indicators of past modification: High bulk density Low organic matter Lack of soil structure Lack of horizons Hardpan
Dramatic change in texture/color Heterogeneous mixture Other: ____________________________________________
Indicators of recovery: Organic matter Structure Horizons Mottling Hydric soil Other: _______________________
Percent of WAA with past modification: _____% Recovery: Complete High Moderate Low None Score: _____
PHYSICAL STRUCTURE
Topographic Complexity – See figures in section 2.3.4.1. Record % micro-topography and % WAA for each elevation gradient.
Elevation gradients (EG): _______ Evidence: Plant assemblages Level of saturation/inundation Path of water flow Slope
Micro-topography: _____% of WAA (By EG: ________________________________________________________________________)
Types:Depressions Pools Burrows Swales Wind-thrown tree holes Mounds Gilgai Islands
Variable shorelines Partially buried debris Debris jams Plant hummocks/roots Other:__________Score: _____
Edge Complexity – Confirm in office review. See figure in section 2.3.4.2 to evaluate wetland-to-upland boundary.
Variability: High Moderate Low None Edge (feet) to Area (square feet) ratio: _______________Score: _____
Physical Habitat Richness – See definitions and table in section 2.3.4.3 for habitat types applicable to each wetland type.
Label of habitat types qualifying as present in WAA: ____________________________________________Total: _____Score: _____
BIOTIC STRUCTURE
Plant Strata – Use applicable wetland delineation regional supplement and data from determination data form(s).
Number of plant strata: 3 2 1 0 Score: _____
Species Richness – Use data from determination data form(s) to count species with 5% or more relative cover in a stratum.
Number of species across all strata and determination data forms (not counting a species more than once): __________Score: _____
Non-Native/Invasive Infestation – Use data from determination data form(s). See tables in section 2.3.5.3 for examples.
Average total relative cover of non-native/invasive species across all strata and determination data forms: __________% Score: _____
Interspersion – Confirm in office review. Use figure in section 2.3.5.4 to determine the degree of interspersion of plant zones.
Degree of horizontal/plan view interspersion: High Moderate Low None Score: _____
Strata Overlap – Use strata defined in plant strata metric using applicable regional supplement. See figures in section 2.3.5.5.
High overlap (VWUDWDRYHUODSSLQJ BBBB_% of WAA Moderate overlap (2 strata overlapping): _____% of WAA
Herbaceous species/dense litter overlap (only in portion where there are no other strata overlapping): _____% of WAA
Total percentage of WAA with some form of overlap (if more than one present): _____% of WAA Score: _____
Herbaceous Cover – Estimate for entire WAA.
Total cover of emergent and submergent plants: > 75% 51–75%26–50% % Score: _____
Vegetation Alterations – Unnatural (human-caused) stressors. Confirm in office review for past.
Type (Check those applicable and circle R for recent or P for past): Disking R/P Mowing/shredding R/P Logging R/P
Cutting R/P Trampling R/P Herbicide treatment R/P Herbivory R/P Disease R/P Chemical spill R/P
Pollution R/P Feral hog rooting R/P Woody debris removal R/P Other R/P: _________________________________
Percent of WAA with recent vegetation alteration: _____% Severity of alteration:High Low
Percent of WAA with past vegetation alteration: _____% Degree of recovery: Complete High Moderate Low
Alteration to improve wetland (degree of natural community recovery):______________________________________Score: _____
20 1
3
25
3
1
20
2
2
A, B, E,O 4 2
3
5 3
0 4
1
15 10
10
35 3
1
0
20
3
Version 1.0 – Final Draft
TXRAM WETLAND FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ________________________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact ( Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Wetland ID/Name: _______________ WAA No.: ____________ Size: ____________ Date: _______________ Evaluator(s): ________________
Wetland Type: ________________________ Ecoregion: ______________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
Aerial Photo Date and Source: ___________________________________ Site Photos: _____________________ Representative: Yes No
Notes: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Core Element Metric Metric Score Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Landscape Connectivity Sum of metric scores / 8
x 20 Buffer
Hydrology
Water source Sum of metric scores / 12
x 20 Hydroperiod
Hydrologic flow
Soils
Organic matter Sum of metric scores / 12
x 20 Sedimentation
Soil modification
Physical Structure
Topographic complexity Sum of metric scores / 12
x 20 Edge complexity
Physical habitat richness
Biotic Structure
Plant strata
Sum of metric scores / 28
x 20
Species richness
Non-native/invasive infestation
Interspersion
Strata overlap
Herbaceous cover
Vegetation alterations
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM wetland score
Additional points for unique resources = overall TXRAM wetland score x 0.10 if:
Area of Caddo Lake designated a “Wetland of International Importance” under the Ramsar Convention
Bald cypress – water tupelo swamp
Pitcher plant bog
Spring
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM wetland score x 0.05 if:
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM wetland score and additional points = total overall TXRAM wetland score
Representative Site Photograph:
[Insert Photograph] [Insert Photograph Description (e.g., direction, location)]
Lebow
Wetland 1 1 0.5 5/23/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Forested Cross Timbers
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
2
0.85 7.1
3
2
4
15
2
3
3
13.3
2
2
2
10
3
3
4
1
3
1
3
12.9
58.3
58.3
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L1-Proposed 1 565 5/19/2011 K Kowalczyk
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 1-2
Urbanized
150 5
21 0.5
21 0.1
Segment L1 is located in a urbanized watershed.
4
555
5
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60.5
Restored Forest
In-stream
60 Native Low 5 90 4.5
0 None Low 0 10 0
4.5
Urban Landscaping
In-stream
20 Native Intense 0 50 0
0 None High 0 50 0
0
10 10
20 10 40
2
✔✔
✔✔✔
✔✔
2121111111
1.2 2
4
3
✔
✔✔✔
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L1-Proposed 1 565 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 1-2
Urbanized
Segment L1 is located in an urbanized watershed
150 5
21 0.5
21 0.1
4
5
5
23.3
4.5
0 11.3
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
66.5
0
66.5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L3-Proposed 1-3 832 4/12/2011 K Kowalczyk
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
145 10
0 0
36 0
4
555
5
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
68
In-stream
Restored Forest
0 None Low 0 10 0
20 Native Low 5 90 4.5
4.5
In-stream
Urban Landscaping
0 None Low 0 50 0
20 Native Intense 0 50 0
0
20 10 0
30 0 40
2
✔
1212
1.5 2
4
3
✔
✔✔✔
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L3-Proposed 3 832 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
145 10
00
36 0
4
5
5
23.3
4.5
0 11.3
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
66.5
0
66.5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L4- Proposed 2 1241 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
120 5
15 0.2
20 0
4
555
5
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60
Restored Forest
In-stream
60 Native Low 5 90 4.5
0 None Low 0 10 0
4.5
Urban landscaping
In-stream
20 Native Intense 0 90 0
0 None Low 0 1 0
0
20 20
20 40
2
✔✔✔✔✔✔
✔✔✔✔
✔✔
✔
2121111111111
1.2 2
4
3
✔
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L4-Proposed 2 1241 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
120 5
15 0.2
20 0
4
5
5
23.3
4.5
0 11.25
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
66.5
0
66.5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L6-Proposed 1-3 2,274 4/14/2011 K Kowalczykf
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography 20-21
Urbanized
150 10
15 0.1
35 0
5
555
5
3
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
67.5
Instream
Restored Forest
0 None Low 0 10 0
60 Native Low 5 90 4.5
4.5
Instream
Urban landscaping
0 None Low 0 10 0
20 Native Intense 0 90 0
0
20 10
30 40
2
✔
✔
111
1 1
4
3
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L6-Proposed 1-3 2,274 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
150 10
15 0.1
35 0
5
5
3
21.7
4.5
0 11.3
2
1 7.5
4
3 21.9
62.3
0
62.3
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
L7-Proposed 1 1,227 4/14/2011 K Kowalczyk
intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
100 6
20 0.2
20 0.1
5
555
5
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
60
Urban Landscaping
In-stream
20 Mixed Intense 0 10 0
Restored Forest
0 None Intense 0 10 0
60 Native Low 5 80 4
4
Urban Landscaping
In-stream
20 Mixed Intense 0 90 0
0 None Intense 0 10 0
0
20 10
30 40
2
✔✔
✔
✔✔
✔
✔✔
21121111
1.25 2
4
3
✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
L7-Proposed 1 1,227 4/14/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
100 6
20 0.2
20 0.1
5
5
5
25
4
0 10
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
66.9
0
66.9
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
Tributary 2-proposed 1 27 5/26/2011 R Reinecke
Ephemeral Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
20 4
0 0
5 0
Proposed channel within the detention area that is dominated by planted native grasses
4
10 10 10
4
4
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
27.5
Grassland 0 Native grasses Low 3 100 3
3
Grassland 0 Native grasses Low 3 100 3
3
10 25
65
2
✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔
111111111
1 1
0
0
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
Tributary 2-Proposed 16275/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Ephemeral Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
Proposed Conditions
20 4
00
50
4
4
4
20
3
3 20
2
1 7.5
0
0 0
57.5
0
57.5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U1-Proposed 1-2 1,412 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
100 5
9 0.1
10 0.5
5
555
5
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
Grassland
In-stream
0 Native Intense 0 90 0
0 None Low 0 10 0
0
Grassland
In-stream
0 Native Low 3 90 2.7
0 None Low 0 10 0
2.7
20 10
30 40
2
✔✔
✔
111111111
1 1
4
3
✔✔
✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U1-Proposed 1-2 1,412 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
100 5
90.1
10 0.5
5
5
5
25
0
2.7 6.75
2
1 7.5
4
3 21.9
61.1
0
61.1
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U2 - Proposed 1 201 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 6
15 0.1
15 0.5
2
Gabion Baskets
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
In-stream
Urban area
0 None Low 0 40 0
Restored Forest
20 Mix Intense 0 40 0
60 Native Low 5 20 1
1
In-stream
Urban Area
0 None Low 0 40 0
Restored Forest
20 Mix Intense 0 40 0
60 Native Low 5 20 1
1
20 10
30 40
2
✔
1 1
4
3
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U2- proposed 1 201 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
40 6
60.1
15 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
1
1 5
2
1 7.5
4
3 21.9
46.0
0
46.0
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U3-Proposed 1 1,096 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 5
6 0.2
16 0.5
2
Gabion Baskets
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
In-stream
Urban area
0 Mix High 1 60 .06
20 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
0 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
20 10
30 40
2
✔✔
✔✔
✔✔✔
1121121111
1.2 2
4
3
✔✔
✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U3-Proposed 1 1,096 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 5
60.2
16 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.6
0.6 3
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
46.6
0
46.6
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U4- Proposed 1 699 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 8
12 0.3
15 0.5
2
Gabion baskets
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
In-stream
Urban area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
20 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
0 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
20 10
30 40
2
✔
✔
✔
1122
1.5 2
4
3
✔✔
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U4-Proposed 1 699 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 8
12 0.3
15 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.6
0.6 3
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
46.6
0
46.6
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U5-Proposed 1-2 1,290 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 5
12 0.5
15 0.5
2
Gabion baskets
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
57.5
In-stream
Urban area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
20 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
0 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
20 10
30 40
2
✔✔
✔
✔
11211112
1.3 2
4
3
✔✔
✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U5-Proposed 1-2 1,290 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 5
12 0.3
15 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.6
0.6 3
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
46.6
0
46.6
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U6- Proposed 1 174 5/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 10
5 1
10 0.5
2
Gabion basket
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
20 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 60 0.6
0 Mix Intense 0 40 0
0.6
20 10
30 40
2
✔
✔
21
1.5 2
4
3
✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U6-Proposed 1 167 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
60 10
51
10 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.6
0.6 3
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
46.6
0
46.6
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U7-Proposed 1 768 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk and M. Huff
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
50 10
5 0.1
12 0.5
1
rock rip rap
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
56
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 50 0.5
20 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 50 0.5
20 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
20 10
30 40
2
✔
✔
1112111
1.1 2
4
3
✔✔
✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U7-Proposed 1 768 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
50 10
50.1
12 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.5
0.5 2.5
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
46.1
0
46.1
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U8- Proposed 1 709 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
50 10
8 0.1
10 0.7
2
Gabion baskets
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
In-stream
Urban area
0 Mix High 1 50 0.5
20 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 50 0.5
0 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
20 10
30 40
2
✔
✔
1121121
1.3 2
4
3
✔✔✔
✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U8-Proposed 1 709 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
50 10
80.1
10 0.5
2
0
5
11.7
0.5
0.5 2.5
2
2 10
4
3 21.9
46.1
0
46.1
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
TXRAM STREAM DATA SHEET
3URMHFW6LWH1DPH1R BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB3URMHFW7\SH )LOO,PSDFW /LQHDU1RQOLQHDU 0LWLJDWLRQ&RQVHUYDWLRQ
6WUHDP,'1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6$51R BBBBB6L]H /) BBBBBBB'DWH BBBBBBBBBBB(YDOXDWRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBB
6WUHDP7\SH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB(FRUHJLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB'HOLQHDWLRQ3HUIRUPHG 3UHYLRXVO\&XUUHQWO\
'LJLW+8& BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG&RQGLWLRQ GHYHORSHGSDVWXUHHWF BBBBBBBBBBBBBB:DWHUVKHG6L]H BBBBBBBBBBB
$HULDO3KRWR'DWHDQG6RXUFH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB6LWH3KRWRV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB5HSUHVHQWDWLYH <HV1R
6WUHVVRU V BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB$UHQRUPDOFOLPDWLFK\GURORJLFFRQGLWLRQVSUHVHQW"<HV1R ,IQRH[SODLQLQ1RWHV
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
$YJ%DQNWR%DQN $YJ%DQNV
$YJ:DWHUV(GJH $YJ:DWHU
$YJ2+:0 $YJ2+:0
1RWHV
CHANNEL CONDITION
)ORRGSODLQ&RQQHFWLYLW\
9HU\OLWWOHLQFLVLRQDQGDFFHVV
WRWKHRULJLQDOIORRGSODLQRU
IXOO\GHYHORSHGZLGHEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
6OLJKWLQFLVLRQDQGOLNHO\
KDYLQJUHJXODU LHDWOHDVW
RQFHD\HDU DFFHVVWR
EDQNIXOOEHQFKHVRUQHZO\
GHYHORSHGIORRGSODLQVDORQJ
PDMRULW\RIWKHUHDFK
0RGHUDWHLQFLVLRQDQG
SUHVHQFHRIQHDUYHUWLFDO
XQGHUFXWEDQNV LUUHJXODU LH
JUHDWHUWKDQ\HDUUHWXUQ
LQWHUYDO DFFHVVWRIORRGSODLQ
RUSRVVLEOHDFFHVVWR
IORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOOEHQFKHV
DWLVRODWHGDUHDV
2YHUZLGHQHGRULQFLVHG
FKDQQHODQGOLNHO\WRZLGHQ
IXUWKHU PDMRULW\RIERWKEDQNV
QHDUYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
XQOLNHO\UDUHO\KDYLQJDFFHVV
WRIORRGSODLQRUEDQNIXOO
EHQFKHV
'HHSO\LQFLVHGFKDQQHORU
FKDQQHOL]HGIORZ VHYHUH
LQFLVLRQZLWKIORZFRQWDLQHG
ZLWKLQWKHEDQNV PDMRULW\RI
EDQNVYHUWLFDOXQGHUFXW
Score: _____
%DQN&RQGLWLRQ
/HIW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB5LJKW%DQN$FWLYH(URVLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBB$YHUDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
%DQN3URWHFWLRQ6WDELOL]DWLRQ 1DWXUDO$UWLILFLDO BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Score: _____
6HGLPHQW'HSRVLWLRQ
/HVVWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ EDUVZLWKHVWDEOLVKHGYHJHWDWLRQ
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ VRPHHVWDEOLVKHGEDUVZLWKLQGLFDWRUVRIUHFHQWO\GHSRVLWHG
VHGLPHQWV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ PRGHUDWHGHSRVLWLRQRQROGEDUVDQGFUHDWLQJQHZEDUV
PRGHUDWHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDWLQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV 25REVWUXFWHGYLHZRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPDQGDODFNRIRWKHUGHSRVLWLRQDO
IHDWXUHV
±RIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQ QHZO\FUHDWHGEDUVSUHYDOHQW KHDY\VHGLPHQWGHSRVLWVDW
LQVWUHDPVWUXFWXUHV
*UHDWHUWKDQRIWKHERWWRPFRYHUHGE\H[FHVVLYHVHGLPHQWGHSRVLWLRQUHVXOWLQJLQDJJUDGLQJFKDQQHO
Score: _____
Lebow Channel
U9-Proposed 1 1030 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
50 14
10 0.5
10 1
2
Gabion basket
0
5
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
3DJHRI
RIPARIAN BUFFER CONDITION
5LSDULDQ%XIIHU6HH7DEOHWRGHWHUPLQHDSSURSULDWHEXIIHUGLVWDQFH&RQILUPLQRIILFHUHYLHZ
,GHQWLI\HDFKEXIIHUW\SHDQGVFRUHDFFRUGLQJWRFDQRS\FRYHUYHJHWDWLRQFRPPXQLW\DQGODQGXVH VHHVHFWLRQ
/HIW%DQN%XIIHU'LVWDQFH BBBBB
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
5LJKW%DQN
%XIIHU7\SH&DQRS\
&RYHU
9HJHWDWLRQ
&RPPXQLW\
/DQG
8VH6FRUH3HUFHQWDJH
RI$UHD6XEWRWDO
Score: _____
IN-STREAM CONDITION
6XEVWUDWH&RPSRVLWLRQ HVWLPDWHSHUFHQWDJHV
%RXOGHU *UDYHO )LQHV VLOWFOD\PXFN $UWLILFLDO
&REEOH 6DQG %HGURFN 2WKHU
Score: _____
,QVWUHDP+DELWDW FKHFNDOOKDELWDWW\SHVWKDWDUHSUHVHQW
+DELWDW7\SH 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 717273
8QGHUFXW%DQNV
2YHUKDQJLQJ9HJHWDWLRQ
5RRWPDWV
5RRWZDGV
:RRG\/HDI\'HEULV
%RXOGHUV&REEOHV
$TXDWLF0DFURSK\WHV
5LIIOH3RRO6HTXHQFH
$UWLILFLDO+DELWDW(QKDQFHPHQW
2WKHU
7RWDO1R3UHVHQW
$YHUDJH BBBBB Score: _____
HYDROLOGIC CONDITION
)ORZ5HJLPH
1RWLFHDEOHVXUIDFHIORZSUHVHQW
&RQWLQXDOSRRORIZDWHUEXWODFNLQJQRWLFHDEOHIORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGLQWHUVWLWLDO VXEVXUIDFH IORZ
,VRODWHGSRROVDQGQRHYLGHQFHRIVXUIDFHRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
'U\FKDQQHODQGQRREVHUYDEOHSRROVRULQWHUVWLWLDOIORZ
Score: _____
&KDQQHO)ORZ6WDWXV
:DWHUFRYHULQJJUHDWHUWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK OHVVWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUFRYHULQJ±RIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK ±RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
:DWHUSUHVHQWEXWFRYHULQJOHVVWKDQRIWKHFKDQQHOERWWRPZLGWK JUHDWHUWKDQRIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHLVH[SRVHG
1RZDWHUSUHVHQWLQWKHFKDQQHO RIFKDQQHOVXEVWUDWHH[SRVHG
Score: _____
55
In-stream
Urban area
0 Mix High 1 50 0.5
20 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
In-stream
Urban Area
0 Mix High 1 50 0.5
20 Mix Intense 0 50 0
0.5
20 10 5
30 40
2
✔
✔
✔✔
112112111
1.1 2
3
3
✔✔
✔✔✔✔✔
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
TXRAM STREAM FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ___________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Stream ID/Name: _________________ SAR No.: _____ Size (LF): _______ Date: ___________ Evaluator(s): _____________
Stream Type: __________________ Ecoregion: ________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
8-Digit HUC: ________________ Watershed Condition (developed, pasture, etc.): ______________ Watershed Size: ___________
Aerial Photo Date and Source: __________________________ Site Photos: _________________ Representative: Yes No
Stressor(s): _______________________ Are normal climatic/hydrologic conditions present? Yes No (If no, explain in Notes)
Notes: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stream Characteristics
6WUHDP:LGWK )HHW 6WUHDP+HLJKW'HSWK )HHW
Avg. Bank to Bank: Avg. Banks:
Avg. Waters Edge:Avg. Water:
Avg. OHWM:Avg. OHWM:
Scoring Table
Core Element Metric Metric Score
Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Channel condition
Floodplain connectivity
Sum of metric scores / 15
x 25Bank condition
Sediment deposition
Riparian buffer condition Riparian buffer (left bank)Sum of bank scores / 10
x 25Riparian buffer (right bank)
In-stream condition Substrate composition Sum of metric scores / 10
x 25In-stream habitat
Hydrologic condition Flow regime Sum of metric scores / 8
x 25Channel flow status
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM stream score
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM stream score x 0.025 for each bank (right/left) if:
LR
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM stream score and additional points = total overall TXRAM stream score
Representative Site Photograph:
>,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK@ >,QVHUW3KRWRJUDSK'HVFULSWLRQ HJGLUHFWLRQORFDWLRQ @
Lebow Channel
U9-Proposed 1 1030 4/19/2011 K. Kowalczyk
Intermittent Cross Timbers
12030102 Developed ~5 sq. miles
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Urbanized
50 14
10 0.5
10 1
2
0
5
11.7
0.5
0.5 2.5
2
2 10
3
3 18.8
42.9
0
42.9
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
Page 1 of 2
TXRAM WETLAND DATA SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ____________________________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact (Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Wetland ID/Name: _____________ WAA No.: ____________ Size: _____________ Date: ________________ Evaluator(s):____________________
Wetland Type: ________________________ Ecoregion: _________________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
Aerial Photo Date and Source: ___________________________________ Site Photos: _________________________ Representative: Yes No
Notes:
LANDSCAPE
Connectivity – Confirm in office review. See figures in section 2.3.1.1 for examples.
Notes on any barriers or alterations that prevent connectivity: ___________________________________________________________
Aquatic resources within 1,000 feet of WAA to which wetland connects (including number for other considerations):_____Score: _____
Buffer – Evaluate to 500 feet from WAA boundary. Confirm in office review. See figures in section 2.3.1.2 for examples.
%XIIHU7\SH'HVFULSWLRQ 6FRUH 6HH1DUUDWLYHV 3HUFHQWDJH 6XEWRWDO
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Score: _____
HYDROLOGY
Water Source – Degree of natural or unnatural/artificial influence. Confirm in office review for watershed.
Natural:Precipitation Groundwater Overbank flow/stream discharge Overland flow Beaver activity Other: _______
Unnatural/Manipulated:Impoundment Outfall Irrigation/pumping Other artificial influence or control: _________________
Watershed: Development Irrigated agriculture Wastewater treatment plant Impoundment Other: _________________
Degree of artificial influence/control:Complete High Low None
Wetland created/restored/enhanced: Sustainable/replicates natural Controlled Score: _____
Hydroperiod – Variability and recent alteration of the duration, frequency, and magnitude of inundation/saturation.
Evaluate the hydroperiod including natural variation: __________________________________________________________________
Direct evidence of alteration: Natural: Log-jam Channel migration Other:________________________________________
Human: Diversions Ditches Levees Impoundments Other: ___________________________________________
Riverine only: Recent channel in-stability/dis-equilibrium (Degradation or Aggradation)
Indirect evidence of alteration:Wetland plant stress: ______________________Plant morphology: ______________________
Upland species encroachment: _________________ Plant Community: _________________Soil: _________________
Change/Alteration of hydroperiod: None Due to natural events Human influences (Slight or High)
Degree hydroperiod of wetland created/restored/enhanced replicates natural patterns: _______________________________________
Lacustrine fringe on human impoundment: High variability Low variability Recent changes to hydroperiod Score: _____
Hydrologic Flow – Movement of water to or from surrounding area and openness to water moving through the WAA.
Flow: Inlets: _____ Outlets: _____ Signs of water movement to or from WAA: _____________________________________
Restrictions: Levee Berm/dam Diversion Other: __________________________________________________________
High flowthrough: Floodplain Drift deposits Drainage patterns Sediment deposits Other: _______________________
Low flowthrough: High landscape position Stagnant water Closed contours Other: __________________Score: _____
SOILS
Organic Matter – Use data and indicators from wetland determination data form(s) based on applicable regional supplement.
High (organic soil or indicator A1, A2, A3)
Moderate (indicator A9, S1, F1 in AW or A9, S1, S2, F1 in GP or A6, A7, A9, S7, F13 in AGCP)
Low (indicated by thin organic or organic-mineral layer)None observable in surface layer as described herein Score: _____
Lebow
1 1 1.1 5/25/2011 R. Reinecke
Herbaceous Cross Timbers
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Proposed wetland
2 2
Grassland 3300.9
Urban area 0700
0.9
4
Highly developed area which wetland will receive frequent overbank flooding likely low variation
Depressional area adjacent to creek
3
11 Tributary entering and existing the wetland
4
2
9HUVLRQ)LQDO'UDIW
Page 2 of 2
Sedimentation – Deposition of excess sediment due to human actions. Confirm in office review for landscape.
Landscape with stress that could lead to excess sedimentation? Yes No Landscape position: High Low
Magnitude of recent runoff/flooding events: High Low Percent of WAA with excess sediment deposition: _____
Sand deposits: _____% of area, _____ average thickness Silt/Clay deposits: _____% of area, _____ average thickness
Lacustrine fringe only: Upper end of impoundment Degrades wetland Contributes to wetland processes Score: _____
Soil Modification – Physical changes by human activities. Confirm in office review for past.
Type (Check those applicable and circle R for recent or P for past): Farming R/P Logging R/P Mining R/P Filling R/P
Grading R/P Dredging R/P Off-road vehicles R/P Other R/P: ____________________________________________
Percent of WAA with recent soil modification: _____% Degree of modification:High Low
Indicators of past modification: High bulk density Low organic matter Lack of soil structure Lack of horizons Hardpan
Dramatic change in texture/color Heterogeneous mixture Other: ____________________________________________
Indicators of recovery: Organic matter Structure Horizons Mottling Hydric soil Other: _______________________
Percent of WAA with past modification: _____% Recovery: Complete High Moderate Low None Score: _____
PHYSICAL STRUCTURE
Topographic Complexity – See figures in section 2.3.4.1. Record % micro-topography and % WAA for each elevation gradient.
Elevation gradients (EG): _______ Evidence: Plant assemblages Level of saturation/inundation Path of water flow Slope
Micro-topography: _____% of WAA (By EG: ________________________________________________________________________)
Types:Depressions Pools Burrows Swales Wind-thrown tree holes Mounds Gilgai Islands
Variable shorelines Partially buried debris Debris jams Plant hummocks/roots Other:__________Score: _____
Edge Complexity – Confirm in office review. See figure in section 2.3.4.2 to evaluate wetland-to-upland boundary.
Variability: High Moderate Low None Edge (feet) to Area (square feet) ratio: _______________Score: _____
Physical Habitat Richness – See definitions and table in section 2.3.4.3 for habitat types applicable to each wetland type.
Label of habitat types qualifying as present in WAA: ____________________________________________Total: _____Score: _____
BIOTIC STRUCTURE
Plant Strata – Use applicable wetland delineation regional supplement and data from determination data form(s).
Number of plant strata: 3 2 1 0 Score: _____
Species Richness – Use data from determination data form(s) to count species with 5% or more relative cover in a stratum.
Number of species across all strata and determination data forms (not counting a species more than once): __________Score: _____
Non-Native/Invasive Infestation – Use data from determination data form(s). See tables in section 2.3.5.3 for examples.
Average total relative cover of non-native/invasive species across all strata and determination data forms: __________% Score: _____
Interspersion – Confirm in office review. Use figure in section 2.3.5.4 to determine the degree of interspersion of plant zones.
Degree of horizontal/plan view interspersion: High Moderate Low None Score: _____
Strata Overlap – Use strata defined in plant strata metric using applicable regional supplement. See figures in section 2.3.5.5.
High overlap (VWUDWDRYHUODSSLQJ BBBB_% of WAA Moderate overlap (2 strata overlapping): _____% of WAA
Herbaceous species/dense litter overlap (only in portion where there are no other strata overlapping): _____% of WAA
Total percentage of WAA with some form of overlap (if more than one present): _____% of WAA Score: _____
Herbaceous Cover – Estimate for entire WAA.
Total cover of emergent and submergent plants: > 75% 51–75%26–50% % Score: _____
Vegetation Alterations – Unnatural (human-caused) stressors. Confirm in office review for past.
Type (Check those applicable and circle R for recent or P for past): Disking R/P Mowing/shredding R/P Logging R/P
Cutting R/P Trampling R/P Herbicide treatment R/P Herbivory R/P Disease R/P Chemical spill R/P
Pollution R/P Feral hog rooting R/P Woody debris removal R/P Other R/P: _________________________________
Percent of WAA with recent vegetation alteration: _____% Severity of alteration:High Low
Percent of WAA with past vegetation alteration: _____% Degree of recovery: Complete High Moderate Low
Alteration to improve wetland (degree of natural community recovery):______________________________________Score: _____
20 1
3
25
100 3
2
20
3
2
A, B, D, E, K, N 6 3
2
5 3
0 4
3
30
90 2
4
0
High 4
Version 1.0 – Final Draft
TXRAM WETLAND FINAL SCORING SHEET
Project/Site Name/No.: ________________________________ Project Type: Fill/Impact ( Linear Non-linear) Mitigation/Conservation
Wetland ID/Name: _______________ WAA No.: ____________ Size: ____________ Date: _______________ Evaluator(s): ________________
Wetland Type: ________________________ Ecoregion: ______________________________ Delineation Performed: Previously Currently
Aerial Photo Date and Source: ___________________________________ Site Photos: _____________________ Representative: Yes No
Notes: ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Core Element Metric Metric Score Core Element Score
Calculation Core Element Score
Landscape Connectivity Sum of metric scores / 8
x 20 Buffer
Hydrology
Water source Sum of metric scores / 12
x 20 Hydroperiod
Hydrologic flow
Soils
Organic matter Sum of metric scores / 12
x 20 Sedimentation
Soil modification
Physical Structure
Topographic complexity Sum of metric scores / 12
x 20 Edge complexity
Physical habitat richness
Biotic Structure
Plant strata
Sum of metric scores / 28
x 20
Species richness
Non-native/invasive infestation
Interspersion
Strata overlap
Herbaceous cover
Vegetation alterations
Sum of core element scores = overall TXRAM wetland score
Additional points for unique resources = overall TXRAM wetland score x 0.10 if:
Area of Caddo Lake designated a “Wetland of International Importance” under the Ramsar Convention
Bald cypress – water tupelo swamp
Pitcher plant bog
Spring
Additional points for limited habitats = overall TXRAM wetland score x 0.05 if:
Dominated by native trees greater than 24-inch diameter at breast height
Dominated by hard mast (i.e., acorns and nuts) producing native species in the tree strata
Sum of overall TXRAM wetland score and additional points = total overall TXRAM wetland score
Representative Site Photograph:
[Insert Photograph] [Insert Photograph Description (e.g., direction, location)]
Lebow
Wetland 1 1.1 5/25/2011 R. Reinecke
Herbaceous Cross Timbers
2008 USDA FSA Aerial Photography
Mitigated wetlands
2
0.9 7.3
4
3
4
18.3
2
3
3
13.3
3
2
3
13.3
2
3
4
3
2
4
4
15.7
67.9
67.9
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
SWF-2010-00470
ATTACHMENT J-3
TxRAM REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photograph 1 – Segment L1 Photograph 2 – Segment L1
Photograph 3 – Segment L2 Photograph 4 – Segment L2
Photograph 5 – Segment L3 SAR 1 Phtogograph 6 – Segment L3 SAR 1
Photograph 7 – Segment L3 SAR 2 Photograph 8 – Segment L3 SAR 2
Photograph 9 – Segment L3 SAR 3 Photograph 10 – Segment L3 SAR 3
Photograph 11 – Segment L4 SAR1 Photograph 12 – Segment L4 SAR 2
Photograph 13 – Segment L4 SAR 2 Photograph 14 – Segment L4 SAR 2
Photograph 15 – Segment L1 SAR1 Photograph 16 – Segment L6 SAR 1
Photograph 17 – Segment L6 SAR 1 Photograph 18 – Segment L6 SAR 2
Photograph 19 – Segment L6 SAR 2 Photograph 20 – Segment L6 SAR 3
Photograph 21 – Segment L6 SAR 3 Photograph 22 – Segment L7 SAR 1
Photograph 23 – Segment L7 SAR 1 Photograph 24 – Segment L7 SAR 2
Photograph 25 – Segment U1 SAR 1 Photograph 26 – Segment U1 SAR 1
Photograph 27 – Segment U1 SAR 2 Photograph 28 – Segment U1 SAR 2
Photograph 29 – Segment U2 Photograph 30 – Segment U2
Photograph 31 – Segment U3 Photograph 32 – Segment U3
Photograph 33 – Segment U4 Photograph 34 – Segment U4
Photograph 35 – Segment U5 SAR 1 Photograph 36 – Segment U5 SAR 1
Photograph 37 – Segment U5 SAR 2 Photograph 38 – Segment U6
Photograph 39 – Segment U6 Photograph 40 – Segment U7
Photograph 41 – Segment U7 Photograph 42 – Segment U8
Photograph 43 – Segment U8 Photograph 44 – Segment U9
Photograph 45 – Segment U9 Photograph 46 – Tributary 2
Photograph 47 – Tributary 2
ATTACHMENT J LEBOW DRAINAGE SEQUENCING AND MITIGATION PLAN
SWF-2010-00470 Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT J-4
SCHEMATIC SHEETS
Sheet 1 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 2 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 3 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 4 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 5 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 6 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 7 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 8 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 9 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet10of17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 11 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 12 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 13 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 14 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 15 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet16of17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
Sheet 17 of 17Schematic Plan - Drainage ImprovementsLebow Channel Watershed City of Fort Worth, TexasUSACE Project No SWF-2010-00470
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 404 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION INFORMATION
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 1 of 11
Tier II 401 Certification Questionnaire
I. IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATER IN THE STATE, INCLUDING WETLANDS
A. What is the area of surface water in the State, including wetlands that will be
disturbed, altered or destroyed by the proposed activity?
Direct Impacts
The project area is located in the City of Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas beginning at DeRidder Avenue and
continuing south along Lebow, finishing approximately 1,000 feet south of Brennan Avenue.
The proposed project (i.e., the preferred alternative) Lebow Channel has been divided into two sections, Upper and
Lower Lebow. The sections will be further divided into segements for implementing construction. The segments
will be completed downstream to upstream over a period of 10 to 15 years or longer. The improvements associated
with Lower Lebow favor more natural and earthen improvements, while Upper Lebow favors more traditional
channel widening and structural improvements.
The project corridor contains approximately 17,955 linear feet of intermittent tributary (Lebow Channel), 684 linear
feet of ephemeral tributaries, and 0.54 acre of forested wetland. Grading activities would occur in approximately
13,313 linear feet of intermittent tributary, 684 feet of ephemeral tributary, 0.54 acre of forested wetland.
Approximately, 4,642 linear feet of intermittent tributary (Lebow Channel) would not be graded; therefore, avoided.
Based on the project activities, the improved channel l ength would be approximately 13,841 linear feet of
intermittent tributary, 627 linear feet of ephemeral tributary, and 1.12 acres of emergent wetland. Under the ultimate
project conditions, Lebow Channel would be approximately 19,102 linear feet, an increase of over 1,100 linear feet.
Indirect Impacts
Given the proposed project activities and the overall phasing of the development there would be no indirect impacts
associated with these actions, as proper construction techniques and best management practic es would be employed.
Temporary Impacts
There should be no temporary impacts associated with the proposed project. All impacts to waters of the United
States within the project site will be direct impacts and as such there will be no temporary impacts.
B. Is compensatory mitigation proposed? If yes, submit a copy of the mitigation plan. If
no, explain why not.
The goal of the project is to create a positive balance of environmental benefits allowing the project to be self -
mitigating. A functional/conditional assessment (Texas Rapid Assessment Method [TxRAM]) was used to
determine the quality of the existing and proposed conditions of Lebow Channel. A compensatory mitigation plan
has been created using stream realignment and reconstruc tion, woody species riparian corridor enhancements, native
prairie grass plantings, and creation of emergent wetlands. Overall, the mitigation plan activities in addition to the
stream restoration create an overall net benefit to the environment within th e Lebow Channel sub-basin and West
Fork Trinity River watershed.
There are four general planting types proposed for the mitigation area – wetland plugs and seed mixes (1.12 acres),
herbaceous native seed mixes (7.09 acres), tree/shrub plantings (8.68 acres), and urban landscaping (8.75 acres).
The planting types will be conducted differently for each of mitigation types on the project. The planting in all areas
will be conducted after the final grading has been completed. Ideally, the seed mix will be planted in the fall and the
trees/shrubs will be planted in winter; however to limit temporal losses, the plant materials will be established as
soon as final grading of each mitigation area is completed . To assist in survival if planting is conducted outside the
ideal planting season, temporary irrigation could be utilized to minimize stress on the new plant materials. The
amount and frequency of temporary irrigation will be dependent upon the season and evapotranspiration rates, but
all irrigation materials will be removed at the establishment of the success criteria. Planting details for each of the
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 2 of 11
planting types is provided in the mitigation plan, along with the mitigation types by segment. Table 1 indicates the
minimum amount of vegetation to be planted.
Table 1. Minimum Amount of Vegetation to be Planted by Segment
Segment No. Acres Mitigation Type
Circular
Plots
Point-Intercept
Transects
L1 1.97 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 2 2
L3 0.68 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 1 1
L4 1.66 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 2 2
L6 1.85 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 2 2
L7 2.49 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 3 3
U1 1.12 Wetlands 2 2
U1 7.09 Native Grasses 7
U2 0.04 Riparian Enhancement/Native Grasses 1 1
C. Please complete the attached Alternatives Analysis Checklist.
See attached
II. DISPOSAL OF WASTE MATERIALS
A. Describe the methods for disposing of materials recovered from the removal or
destruction of existing structures.
Any removed materials would not be considered hazardous so the City of Fort Worth would contactor a contactor to
dispose of the material in an approved method. The contactor would be responsible for informing the city as to how
they plan to dispose of the material.
B. Describe the methods for disposing of sewage generated during construction. If the
proposed work establishes a business or a subdivision, describe the method for disposing of
sewage after completing the project.
During construction activities, temporary portable toilets will be used and maintained by a professional company.
The project is stream channel improvements; there will be no disposing of sewage after completing the project.
C. For marinas, describe plans for collecting and disposing of sewage from marine
sanitation devices. Also, discuss provisions for the disposing of sewage generated from day-
to-day activities.
As described previously, the project is a stream channel improvement project; therefore, this section is not
applicable.
III. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS
A. Describe the methods to minimize the short-term and long-term turbidity and
suspended solids in the waters being dredged and/or filled. Also, describe the type of
sediment (sand, clay, etc.) that will be dredged or used for fill.
Short term turbidity will be minimized through the phasing of the project. During construction only a small segment
of earthen material will be exposed at any one time, which will minimize turbidity and soils being suspended within
the water column.
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 3 of 11
B. Describe measures that will be used to stabilize disturbed soil areas, including:
dredge material mounds, new levees or berms, building sites, and construction work areas.
The description should address both short-term (construction related) and long-term
(normal operation or maintenance) measures. Typical measures might include containment
structures, drainage modifications, sediment fences, or vegetative cover. Special
construction techniques intended to minimize soil or sediment disruption should also be
described.
As only preliminary engineering has been completed on this project, the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) has not been completed. However, there are numerous practice s that will be utilized during the
construction of the project. Short-term measures include sediment fences, rock check dams, and vegetative cover.
The site erosion will be minimized through construction of the project is phases. Water paths will not be allowed to
flow over any length of unprotected soils surface (i.e., the storm drains would be constructed initially to facilitate
clean water traveling across the site). Water entering the storm drains would be protected through check dams and
sediment fencing, as the outfalls would be protected with check dams, vegetation plantings, and/or erosion blankets
(as necessary to ensure slope/channel protection.) All these methods will be detailed in a SWPPP that will be
maintained on-site during the construction of the site.
C. Discuss how hydraulically dredged materials will be handled to ensure maximum
settling of solids before discharging the decant water. Plans should include a calculation of
minimum settling times with supporting data (Reference: Technical Report, DS-7810,
Dredge Material Research Program, GUIDELINES FOR DESIGNING, OPERATING, AND
MAINTAINING DREDGED MATERIAL CONTAINMENT AREAS). If future maintenance dredging
will be required, the disposal site should be designed to accommodate additional dredged
materials. If not, please include plans for periodically removing the dried sediments from
the disposal area.
Not applicable to this permit.
D. Describe any methods used to test the sediments for contamination, especially when
dredging in an area known or likely to be contaminated, such as downstream of municipal or
industrial wastewater discharges.
Not applicable to this permit.
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 4 of 11
Alternatives Analysis Checklist
I. ALTERNATIVES
A. How could you satisfy your needs in ways which do not affect surface water in the
State?
Lebow Channel is the main drainage feature throughout this sub-watershed basin that conveys a significant amount
of water during larger storm events. However, this channel does not convey the 100 -year storm event within the
channel; thereby resulting in a larger floodplain through this urban area. Many residences and commercial
structures become inundated during these larger storm events. Significant flood hazards that have occurred along
Lower Lebow include inundated creek crossings, inundation of Decatur Avenue, flooded structures, and the loss of
life on two occasions. The overall purpose of the proposed project is to reduce the urban area that is inundated by
these larger flood events. The City of Fort Worth ’s goal is to use this channel enhancement project to reduce the
floodplain in the highly urbanized segments of the channel, thereby reducing flooding of road, propert y damage, and
reducing the safety issues that have occurred during flooding, while enhancing the environmen tal benefits within the
less urbanized segment.
B. How could the project be re-designed to fit the site without affecting surface water in
the State?
The following are major considerations to the planning process associated with alleviating the flooding hazards
associated with Lebow Channel.
Nearly the entire watershed and floodplain of Lebow Channel has been urbanized for more than 50 years.
There are portions that are dominated by residential structures/developments and other areas have
commercial/industrial structures. At the time that this watershed developed, there was little concern of
flooding or floodplains as demonstrated by the number of structures built adjacent to the channel. The
project planning and phasing considered the density of struct ures in each project segment to evaluate the
impacts associated with encroachment and potential relocation.
As the area developed, the road network was planned and constructed on a grid basis resulting in numerous
road crossings of the Lebow Channel and a major thoroughfare, Decatur Avenue, paralleling the channel
for a distance. Project alternatives considered the appropriate sizing of the existing culverts, potential for
bridging the channel to reduce impacts, and the potential for removing unnecessary r oads.
A significant constraint was the existing culverted section of Lebow Channel under the BNSF railroad line
and Long Avenue which, due to the grade constraints of rail lines; would be significant cost to redesign and
reconstruct this culvert system. Due to the significant cost associated with redesigning this culvert, the
alternatives analysis considered ways to accommodate this existing culvert structure.
There are numerous utilities, both private and public, that service the area. The alternatives a nalysis
considered the potential impacts or avoidance associated with the utilities for both cost of relocation and
safety of construction.
There is a significant cost to correct the overriding flooding issue adjacent to Lebow Channel. As the City
of Fort Worth will be funding this project with their stormwater fund, the project will be staged over
numerous years. The project alternatives were developed in a manner so that the project can be segmented
in smaller and more manageable sub-projects to accommodate limited funding. As the project was divided
into segments, each segment was required to provide immediate benefit to the local area (i.e., there must be
reduced flooding hazards associated with the project segment, as opposed to requiring additional future
segments to be constructed to achieve a benefit).
There are limited design alternatives that accomplish the project’s purpose and goals while considering the
constraints in the area. Table 2 provides a general summary.
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 5 of 11
Table 2. Potential Design Alternatives by Type
Design
Alternative Description Pro’s Con’s
Floodplain
Restoration
Construct new, reduced floodplain,
through over-bank excavation. This
would require purchase of some
structures, but not all structures,
within the existing 100-year
floodplain
Reduces impacts to the creek, improves
the floodplain connectivity associated
with a bankfull discharge, and restores
floodplain functions. If conducted in
the southern portion of the project (i.e.,
Lower Lebow), this design alternative
would have some residential
relocations. This design alternative
could be conducted to accommodate the
removal of roadway flood hazards.
This minimizes the need for separate
valley storage mitigation. Design can
be segmented.
If conducted in the northern portion of
the project (i.e., Upper Lebow), there
could be a significant number of
residential relocation required. To
effectively accommodate this
alternative, property acquisition for
some parts of the project area would
need to be accomplished on both sides
of the creek. Increased cost in densely
populated areas.
No Grading,
Remove
Structures from
Floodplain
Purchase of all structures in existing
floodplain, which would remove the
flooding hazard associated with
houses and businesses
There would be no disruptions to the
existing creeks functions. There would
be no need for separate valley storage
mitigation. Design can be segmented.
Significant cost, there would be a public
opinion and social/economic impact to
the local area as there are hundreds of
structures in the floodplain. As the
creek has been encroached upon, this
alternative does not have a benefit for
restoring the natural channel design and
function. Without re-construction of
the roadways, this alternative would
still result in the roadways being
inundated by floods.
Bypass
Channels
Parallel channels that add conveyance
and storage of water that the existing
channel does not provide
Reduces impacts to the existing creek
as only grading within the channel is
associated with the bypass channel
entrance and exit.
Bypass channel would have to be near
the existing creek to avoid construction
against the grade. Numerous structures
would have to be purchased and
existing roadways would be redesigned
and relocated. This design alternative
cannot be segmented and would be cost
prohibitive.
Bypass Culverts Similar to Bypass Channels, this
alternative would make subterranean
conduits to assist in conveying
floodwaters.
Culverting the floodplain flows could
be accomplished with beneficial land
use such as roads (i.e., the culvert
system could be built under an existing
road). Reduces impacts to the existing
creek as the only grading within the
channel is associated with the bypass
culvert entrance and exit.
This alternative does not address valley
storage; detention would need to be
accommodated within the project.
There are very few locations where
there is symbiotic land use (i.e., there
are no roadways that parallel the creek
that accommodate the grades). There
would be a loss of natural ecological
floodplain functions. This design
alternative cannot be segmented and
would be cost prohibitive.
Creek
Channelization
Following the existing creek
alignment, a new creek channel would
be excavated wider and deeper.
This would have the least impacts to the
local population as there would be very
little relocation. This design alternative
could be conducted to accommodate the
removal of roadway flood hazards.
Design can be segmented.
Creek channelization will have the most
disruption and impacts to existing
stream functions. Due to the space
limitations there would bank protection
requirements of the banks, whether it be
with concrete or hard armoring baskets.
This design alternative does not address
valley storage; detention would need to
be accommodated within the project.
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 6 of 11
C. How could the project be made smaller and still meet your needs?
The project has been designed based on the flooding problems and flood capacity needs for the area. There would
be no way to make the project smaller and still need to purpose and need of the project.
D. What other sites were considered?
No other sites where considered for this project because the goal of the project is to reduce the flood damage in that
area.
E. What are the consequences of not building the project?
There will be continued flooding to the area. The effect of not building could be potentially negative due to the high
density of residences with the project corridor. There has already been two death associated with this flooding and
the City of Fort Worth would like to reduce the likelihood of flooding and flood damage.
II. COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
A. How do the costs compare for the alternatives considered above?
Each of the design alternatives has positives and negatives when considered for the entire length of the project.
Once the existing infrastructure constraints are consid ered there are merits for combining particular design
alternatives. However, bypass culverts were not considered within this project corridor as there was no location that
could accommodate the beneficial use of this design type. Through the study of the existing infrastructure,
constraints, and cost, there was only one design alternative that would accommodate the project’s goals, while
having the least disruption to the human and ecological environments. The following is a description of the
considered alternatives.
No Build Alternative
No Build – Not performing any improvements to the watershed would result in the continued health and human
safety concerns. There would be continued flood hazards to hundreds of structures, both residences and businesse s,
and roadways. The risk associated with loss of life would continue to persist.
On-Site Build Alternative
Lebow Channel Improvements (Build Alternative) – The project was divided into an upper and lower section s
based on the project constraints, which provided the ability to incorporate different design alternatives into different
segments. The Lower Lebow segments included the use of Floodplain Restoration, No Grading, Remove Structures
from Floodplain, and Bypass Channels design alternatives. The Upp er Lebow segments only lend to Creek
Channelization design alternatives. The following describe the design alternatives in each section.
In general, the Lower Lebow Channel improvements favor restoration of a more natural floodplain due to the
lower density of structures. This will include wider benched areas, flatter banks and more meander of the corridor.
The channel improvements will consist of expanding channel capacity by excavating a broad earthen channel with
gently sloping banks and a low-flow channel in the bottom. Several drop structures have been proposed to create a
channel section and flow line slope which will maintain channel capacity and reduces erosive velocities. Design
alternatives were considered for Dewey Street and Brennan Avenue. Structural and grading improvement options
were considered for both streets based on impact to adjacent properties, constructability, property acquisition needs,
construction costs and environmental impacts.
The Upper Lebow Channel has a higher density residential lots than the Lower Lebow Channel. Substantial
structural improvements and additional channel capacity are required to reduce the flood risk. The proposed channel
consists of a widened, lowered, and hard armoring solution (natural bottom) channel. This section will also include
a stormwater detention facility with the capacity to offset the loss of valley storage associated with the proposed
upstream channelization. Design alternative were considered for 36th Street, Weber Street, and De Ridder Avenue.
The major constraints considered at these locations were the channel’s alignment and impact on the existing
residential structures. Each selected alternative was chosen based on the best design for improving stormwater
conveyance in a safe and sustainable method.
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 7 of 11
B. Are there logistical (location, access, transportation, etc.) reasons that limit the
alternatives considered?
There are no logistical limitations associated with the alternatives considered.
C. Are there technological limitations for the alternatives considered?
There are no technological limitations associated with the alternatives considered.
D. Are there other reasons certain alternatives are not feasible?
The primary reasons that other alternatives are not feasible are due to human safety issue associated with flooding of
the channel.
III. IF YOU HAVE NOT CHOSEN AN ALTERNATIVE WHICH WOULD AVOID IMPACTS
TO SURFACE WATER IN THE STATE, PLEASE EXPLAIN:
A. Why your alternative was selected, and
The Build Alternative was selected due to the need to reduce flooding in the area.
B. What you plan to do to minimize adverse effects on the surface water in the State
impacted.
Overall, the City of Fort Worth and the Design Team have made an effort to reduce the impacts to natural portions
of Lebow Channel, where possible. As mentioned previously, the proposed project avoids over 5,000 linear feet of
intermittent tributary (29.9 percent of the intermittent tributary within the project corridor) and over 200 feet of
ephemeral tributary (27.1 percent of the ephemeral tributaries in the project corridor). Table 3 summarizes the
segments of the project for both Upper (U1 through U9) and Lo wer (L1 through L7) Lebow along with segment
station numbers, length of existing stream, and the length and area of impacts. Table 4 summarizes the TxRAM
condition scores for the existing conditions along the entire length of each segment, as well as an existing
conditional equivalent length for the proposed impacted length of each segment. The conditional equivalent length
of existing segment avoided is not included within the calculations; as those conditions would not be alter by the
proposed project. Table 5 summarizes the proposed conditions of each segment, the conditional equivalent length
for the impacted length, and the difference in conditional equivalent length indicating either a net environmental
benefit from the activities or a net loss. Th e TxRAM data forms and photographs are included in Attachments F and
C, respectively. Additionally, a brief description and photograph are provided for the existing conditions of each
stream segment. As mentioned previously, construction activities would be sequenced in such a way as to combine
segment construction activities to create a net environmental benefit. Overall, this project creates a net benefit of
2,214 conditionally equivalent linear feet of stream.
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 8 of 11
Table 3. Segment Descriptions, Length of Stream, and Length and Area of Impact
Segment Description Station SAR Priority
Length of
Existing
Stream
(feet)
Length of
Impact
(feet)
Area
of
Impact
(acres)
L1
Stream Restoration: Downstream of
Brennan Ave.
9+00 to
26+6.13 1 5 1,823 813 0.39
L2 Brennan Ave. Roadway Crossing
26+0613 to
26+78.26 1 1 71 71 0.11
L3
Stream Restoration: Brennan Ave. to 28th
St.
26+78.26 to
28+93 and
40+00 to
46+68.79
1 6 853 224 0.11
2 6 859 388 0.09
3 6 323 323 0.02
L4
SH 183 (28th Street) Bridge Crossing (Prior
NWP 14)
46+68.79 to
47+69.79
101 0 0
Stream Restoration: 28th St. to Dewey St.
47+69.79 to
60+13.81
1 9 161 161 0.03
2 9 1,229 1,229 0.20
L5
Dewey St. Roadway Crossing (Prior NWP
14)
60+13.81 to
60+62.69 1 2 51 0.00
L6
Stream Restoration: Dewey Street to
Schwartz Ave.
60+62.62 to
89.00
1 12 1,383 492 0.13
2 12 1,262 552 0.06
3 12 315 315 0.14
L7
Stream Restoration: Schwartz Ave. to
Diamond St.
90+00 to
102+70
1 15 1,293 1,293 0.37
2 15 61 0 0.00
T2 Tributary 2
3 684 684 0.06
LA Long Avenue (No Impacts)
102+70 to
109+96.11
631 0 0.00
U1 Upper Lebow Storm Water Detention
109+96.11
to123+22.92
1 3 988 987 0.27
2 3 433 433 0.09
U2
36th Street Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
123+22.92 to
126+16.13 1 4 200 200 0.05
U3
Beaumont St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
126+16.13 to
137+13.11 1 7 1,092 1092 0.31
U4
Jasper St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
137+13.11 to
144+14.46 1 8 701 701 0.20
U5
Terminal Rd. Roadway Crossing &
Upstream and Downstream Chanel
144+14.46 to
157+50
1 10 783 783 0.17
2 10 506 506 0.09
U6
Weber St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
157+50 to
158+79.27 1 11 173 173 0.05
U7
Hardy St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
158+79.27 to
166+48.34 1 13 768 768 0.18
U8 Channel from Decatur Ave. to Hardy St.
166+48.34 to
174+21.62 1 15 770 770 0.15
U9
DeRidder Ave. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
174+21.62 to
184+51.42 1 16 1,037 1037 0.17
Total 18,639 13,997 3.43
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 9 of 11
Table 4. Segment Descriptions, Length of Impacted
Stream, Existing TxRAM Condition Score, and Existing Conditional Equivalent Length
Segment Description Station SAR
Length of
Impact
(feet)
TxRAM
Existing
Condition
Score
Existing
Conditional
Equivalent
(feet)
Combined
Existing
Conditional
Equivalent
(feet)
L1
Stream Restoration: Downstream
of Brennan Ave.
9+00 to
26+6.13 1 813 41.7 339.0 339.0
L2 Brennan Ave. Roadway Crossing
26+0613 to
26+78.26 1 71 17.6 12.5 12.5
L3
Stream Restoration: Brennan Ave.
to 28th St.
26+78.26 to
28+93 and
40+00 to
46+68.79
1 224 32.5 72.8
223.9
2 388 29.2 113.3
3 323 11.7 37.8
L4
SH 183 (28th Street) Bridge
Crossing (Prior NWP 14)
46+68.79 to
47+69.79
0
Stream Restoration: 28th St. to
Dewey St.
47+69.79 to
60+13.81
1 161 10.8 17.4
517.6 2 1,229 40.7 500.2
L5
Dewey St. Roadway Crossing
(Prior NWP 14)
60+13.81 to
60+62.69
L6
Stream Restoration: Dewey Street
to Schwartz Ave.
60+62.62 to
89.00
1 492 40.5 200.1
551.5
2 552 43.3 239.0
3 315 35.7 112.5
L7
Stream Restoration: Schwartz
Ave. to Diamond St.
90+00 to
102+70
1 1,293 44.8 579.3
579.3 2 0 18.0 0.0
T2 Tributary 2 684 29.2 199.7 199.7
LA Long Avenue (No Impacts)
102+70 to
109+96.11
U1
Upper Lebow Storm Water
Detention
109+96.11
to123+22.92
1 988 25.1 247.7
425.7 2 433 41.1 178.0
U2
36th Street Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
123+22.92 to
126+16.13 1 200 30.8 61.6 61.6
U3
Beaumont St. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
126+16.13 to
137+13.11 1 1,092 52.1 568.9 568.9
U4
Jasper St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
137+13.11 to
144+14.46 1 701 56.8 398.2 398.2
U5
Terminal Rd. Roadway Crossing &
Upstream and Downstream
Chanel
144+14.46 to
157+50
1 783 57.8 452.6
635.2 2 506 36.1 182.7
U6
Weber St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
157+50 tp
158+79.27 1 173 36.8 63.7 63.7
U7
Hardy St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
158+79.27 to
166+48.34 1 768 35.2 270.3 270.3
U8
Channel from Decatur Ave. to
Hardy St.
166+48.34 to
174+21.62 1 770 54.7 421.2 421.2
U9
DeRidder Ave. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
174+21.62 to
184+51.42 1 1,037 50.2 520.6 520.6
Total 13,997
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 10 of 11
Table 5. Segment Descriptions, Length of Impacted Stream, Proposed TxRAM Condition Score,
Proposed Conditional Equivalent Length, and Conditional Equivalent Length Balance
Segment Description Station SAR
Improved
Channel
Mitigation
Length (feet)
TxRAM
Proposed
Condition
Score
Proposed
Conditional
Equivalent
(feet)
Conditional
Equivalent
Difference
(feet)
L1
Stream Restoration: Downstream
of Brennan Ave.
9+00 to
26+6.13 1 565.0 66.5 375.7 36.7
L2 Brennan Ave. Roadway Crossing
26+0613 to
26+78.26 1 70.0 17.6 12.3 -0.2
L3
Stream Restoration: Brennan Ave.
to 28th St.
26+78.26 to
28+93 and
40+00 to
46+68.79
1
566.0 66.5 369.7 152.5
2
3
L4
SH 183 (28th Street) Bridge
Crossing (Prior NWP 14)
46+68.79 to
47+69.79
1241
66.5
0.0
825.3
307.7
Stream Restoration: 28th St. to
Dewey St.
47+69.79 to
60+13.81
1
2
L5
Dewey St. Roadway Crossing
(Prior NWP 14)
60+13.81 to
60+62.69 1 0 0 0.0 0.0
L6
Stream Restoration: Dewey Street
to Schwartz Ave.
60+62.62 to
89.00
1
2365.0 62.3 1473.4 921.9
2
3
L7
Stream Restoration: Schwartz
Ave. to Diamond St.
90+00 to
102+70
1
1261.0 66.9 843.6 264.3 2
T2 Tributary 2 627.0 57.5 360.5 160.8
LA Long Avenue (No Impacts)
102+70 to
109+96.11
U1
Upper Lebow Storm Water
Detention
109+96.11
to123+22.92
1
1,412.0 61.1 862.7 437.0 2
U2
36th Street Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
123+22.92 to
126+16.13 1 201.0 46.0 92.5 30.9
U3
Beaumont St. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
126+16.13 to
137+13.11 1 1,096.0 46.6 510.7 -58.2
U4
Jasper St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
137+13.11 to
144+14.46 1 700.0 46.6 326.2 -72.0
U5
Terminal Rd. Roadway Crossing &
Upstream and Downstream
Chanel
144+14.46 to
157+50
1
1,290.0 46.6 601.1 -34.1 2
U6
Weber St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
157+50 tp
158+79.27 1 173.0 46.6 80.6 17.0
U7
Hardy St. Roadway Crossing &
Downstream Channel
158+79.27 to
166+48.34 1 768.0 46.1 354.0 83.7
U8
Channel from Decatur Ave. to
Hardy St.
166+48.34 to
174+21.62 1 770.0 46.1 355.0 -66.2
U9
DeRidder Ave. Roadway Crossing
& Downstream Channel
174+21.62 to
184+51.42 1 1,033.0 42.9 443.2 -77.4
Total 14,138.0
2,104.4
ATTACHMENT K SECTION 401 TIER II QUESTIONNAIRE & ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
SWF-2010-00470 Page 11 of 11
IV. PLEASE PROVIDE A COMPARISON OF EACH CRITERIA (FROM PART II) FOR
EACH SITE EVALUATION IN THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.
Table 6. Comparison Matrix
Alternatives Costs Logistics Technological Other
Project Site
No Build (Option 1) No Cost NA NA Does not alleviate
the flooding problem
Build
Build (Option 2) Economically
feasible
NA NA Alleviates the
flooding problems
that are causing
property damage and
human safety issues.