TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Jacksonville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application for a Department of the Army permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1344) as described below:
APPLICANT: Florida Department of Transportation – District 7
Attn: Ms. Virginia Creighton
11201 N. McKinley Drive
Tampa, Florida 33612
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the United States associated with Duck Slough, which ultimately flows to Old Tampa Bay, a Traditional Navigable Waterway. The project site is located, primarily along a segment of the Duke Energy power line corridor, from the Pinellas County line north to along the south side of State Road 54 to the intersection of Starkey Boulevard and Town Avenue in Pasco County. The project would extend approximately 2.4 miles, in Section 25, Township 26 South, Range 16 East; Section 36, Township 26 South, Range 16 East; Section 19, Township 26 South, Range 17 East; Section 30, Township 26 South, Range 17 East; and Section 1, Township 27 South, Range 16 East; New Port Ritchie, Pasco County, Florida.
Directions to the site are as follows: From State Road 589 (Veterans Expressway) in Odessa, take State Road 54 west to Starkey Boulevard. The project would run along the Duke Energy power line utility easement to south of Trinity Boulevard.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 28.1925 °
Longitude -82.6490 °
PROJECT PURPOSE:
Basic: The basic project purpose is recreation.
Overall: The overall project purpose is for recreation, through the construction of a multi-use trail segment, identified as the Starkey Gap Trail, which would connect the Pinellas Trail, currently under construction, to the existing Starkey Trail, providing a missing segment to the Coast to Coast Connector, and offer additional recreational opportunities to residents of Central Pasco County.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The information provided by the applicant indicates that the proposed project limits encompass approximately 13.85 acres. Land uses within the project area consists primarily of undeveloped areas with some low density residential interspersed. As classified using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS), the undeveloped lands consist of pastureland and cropland (2100), cypress (6210), and wet prairies (6430). Wetlands and surface waters that fall within the project limits include Duck Slough, ditches, and lakes. None of the wetland or surface water systems within the project area are located within Outstanding Florida Waters, Aquatic Preserves, Class I or II Waters or sovereign submerged lands. Information sources were utilized by the applicant to assess potential wetland involvement within the project area, including the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soils data and SWFWMD FLUCFCS maps. A wetland jurisdictional determination was performed in the field by the applicant’s consultant in October 2015, pursuant to Chapter 62-340, of the Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) and the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and Regional Supplement. Following are the findings:
Wetlands:
USFWS Classification: PEM FLUCFCS Code: 641-Freshwater Marsh: Thirteen wetland areas consisting of this classification were identified within project Right of Way (ROW). All of the wetlands in the ROW are herbaceous, except for Wetland 7 and portions of Wetland 6 and 13. The quality of these herbaceous wetlands is variable. It is likely many of these wetlands were previously forested but were logged for power line clearance. Wetlands 1 and 2 were likely created incidental to golf course construction. The Wetland 6 (Duck Slough) hydrology has been severely restricted by an upstream water control structure. Additionally, portions of Wetlands 8 and 11 have been excavated and filled for the utility access road. All of the wetlands support some nuisance and exotic vegetation including torpedo grass (Panicum repens), Peruvian primrose-willow (Ludwigia peruviana), and Cuban bulrush (Oxycaryum cubense). The herbaceous wetlands in the corridor generally support groundsel tree (Baccharis spp.), maiden-cane (Panicum hemitomon), dotted smartweed (Persicaria punctata), seaside goldenrod (Solidago sempervirens), climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens), lamp rush (Juncus effusus), dog-fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), cattail (Typha sp.), wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), and angle-stem primrose-willow (Ludwigia leptocarpa).
USFWS Classification: PFO2 FLUCFCS Code: 621 – Cypress: Forested wetlands are not common on the ROW because most of the trees have been removed for power line clearance. Wetland 13, however, is a cypress dome, a portion of which is located in the proposed trail ROW but not under the power lines. The forested portion of this wetland is dominated by bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) with wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) occurring on the edges. The herbaceous outer edges are dominated by water paspalum (Paspalum repens). Other species included water spangles (Salvinia minima), lamp rush, Peruvian primrose willow, angle-stem primrose-willow, short-leaf spike sedge (Kyllinga brevifolia), torpedo grass, and big carpet grass (Axonopus furcatus).
USFWS Classification: PSS1 FLUCFCS Code: 631 – Wetland Scrub: Portions of Wetlands 6 and 7 within the ROW are identified as scrub-shrub wetlands. Wetland 6 ultimately connects to Duck Slough to the west. However, the water budget for this wetland has been severely affected by an upstream water control structure. As such this wetland mainly supports wax myrtle, Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana), Peruvian primrose willow, groundsel tree, dotted smartweed, swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum), and blackberry (Rubus sp.). Wetland 7 supports Carolina willow and wax myrtle. The ground cover is dominated by Peruvian primrose-willow, lamp rush, maiden-cane, and cattails. Like most of the other wetlands in the proposed trail alignment, trees were removed to prevent conflict with the overhead utility lines.
Surface Waters
USFWS Classification: N/A FLUCFCS Code: 510 – Streams and waterways: Other Surface Waters (OSW) 2, 3 and 4 are identified as portions of upland cut ditches that occur in the project area and run parallel to State Route 54 Eastbound.
USFWS Classification: N/A FLUCFCS Code: 524 – Lakes less than 10 acres: Other Surface Water 1 occurs near the southern end of the trail alignment. While the majority of this feature is open water, herbaceous wetlands form the littoral edges of this small lake. Herbaceous species present include Peruvian primrose willow, seaside goldenrod, torpedo grass, maiden-cane, lamp rush, broom sedge (Andropogon virginicus) and water paspalum.
PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to discharge fill material into waters of the United States in order to construct a 2.4-mile-long multi-purpose trail, to be located primarily within the Duke Energy power line corridor from the Pinellas County line north to along the south side of State Road 54 to the intersection of Starkey Boulevard and Town Avenue in Pasco County. The trail, commonly referred to as the Starkey Gap Trail, would connect the Pinellas Trail, which is currently under construction, to the Starkey Trail. This trail system is part of the Coast to Coast Connector which would ultimately link the communities between St. Petersburg and Titusville. From the Pinellas County Line to State Road 54, the proposed Starkey Gap Trail would consist of a meandering north-south, 12-foot-wide asphalt path. At State Road 54, the trail would turn west and run for approximately 1,000-feet through a dedicated easement and then cross State Road 54 to continue north within the existing Pasco County ROW and would ultimately connect to the Starkey Trail at Town Avenue. Within the Pasco County ROW, the proposed asphalt trail would be 10 feet wide and would run parallel to the roadway. The project would result in 1.41 acres of permanent impacts to palustrine wetlands (1.20 acres herbaceous, 0.20 acre scrub-shrub, and 0.01 acre forested) and 0.09 acre of permanent impacts to ditches for placement of fill material and excavation activities. Additionally, the project would result in 2.53 acres of secondary palustrine wetlands impacts (2.10 acre herbaceous, 0.34 acre scrub-shrub, .09 acre forested). The secondary impacts are expected to result due to a decreased value of location/landscape since the trail would fragment wetland areas, disrupting habitat and dispersal corridors for aquatic, semi-aquatic and terrestrial wildlife. The edges of the trail could provide habitat for nuisance and exotic plant species. Trash and pet waste would be introduced into the adjacent wetlands. As such, a 25-foot buffer adjacent to the proposed wetland impact areas was assessed for secondary impacts. The project is associated with FPID # 435719-1-52-01.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION INFORMATION – The applicant has provided the following information in support of efforts to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the aquatic environment: Consideration was given to avoiding and minimizing wetland impacts. There are no practicable alternatives to the proposed construction in wetlands, and the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize adverse effects to wetlands that may result from proposed construction, including using the existing dirt road to minimize wetland impacts. The proposed design represents the minimum amount of fill required in order to achieve the project purpose and meet the FDOT safety criteria and drainage requirements. The project would be constructed in accordance with the 401 Water Quality Certification and Best Management Practices during construction would be implemented to avoid water quality degradation.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant has offered the following compensatory mitigation plan to offset unavoidable functional loss to the aquatic environment: The applicant utilized the Uniform Mitigation Assessment Methodology (UMAM) to analyze the potential functional losses from the proposed impacts to the aquatic resources. In total, the applicant determined that the proposed project would result in 1.05 UMAM functional loss units for the proposed direct and secondary wetlands impacts. To offset this anticipated loss, the applicant proposes to purchase 1.05 UMAM units from the federally-approved Upper Coastal Mitigation Bank and/or the federally-approved Old Florida Mitigation Bank. The proposed project is within the service areas of both of these banks.
CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps is not aware of any known historic properties within the permit area. By copy of this public notice, the Corps is providing information for review. Our final determination relative to historic resource impacts is subject to review by and coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer and those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area.
ENDANGERED SPECIES: The Corps has determined the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to affect the Eastern Indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) and the wood stork (Mycteria americana), and would have no effect on the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens).
Eastern Indigo Snake: This species is found in a variety of habitats, including swamps, wet prairies, xeric pinelands and scrub areas. It may utilize gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) burrows for shelter during the winter and to escape the heat during the summer. This species feeds on snakes, frogs, salamanders, toads, small mammals, birds and young turtles. According to the consultant’s site evaluations, approximately 9 gopher tortoise burrows would be affected by the proposed project. Gopher tortoises must be relocated before any land clearing or development takes place within 25 feet of their burrows. Permits are required from the FWC to capture and relocate tortoises to an approved recipient site. Additionally, the applicant would adhere to the Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake. Given the above information, the potential impacts were evaluated using The Eastern Indigo Snake Programmatic Effect Determination Key, August 2013. Use of the Eastern Indigo snake key resulted in the following sequential determination: A > B > C > D > E = not likely to adversely affect the Eastern Indigo snake.
Wood Stork: This proposed project is located within the core foraging area (CFA) of nine wood stork colony buffers (Northlakes – Sagebrush, Sheldon Road - Citrus Park, Anclote River, Embassy - Shoppers Way, Greenbrooke, Heron Island, Heron Point - Land O Lakes, Seven Springs, Alligator Lake). Wetlands within this range, including those found in the project ROW, are therefore considered Core Foraging Areas (CFA) for the wood stork. Wood storks utilize freshwater and estuarine habitats for nesting, foraging, and roosting. Good foraging conditions are characterized by water that is relatively calm and open with depths between 5 and 15 inches (5 and 38 cm). Preferred foraging habitat includes wetlands exhibiting a mosaic of submerged and/or emergent aquatic vegetation, and shallow, open-water areas subject to hydrologic regimes ranging from dry to wet. As such, Suitable Foraging Habitat (SFH) potentially occurs throughout the proposed trail corridor. Many wood storks were observed during the consultant’s site visit. SFH compensation will be provided within the service area of a federally-approved wetland mitigation bank. Given the above information, the Corps reviewed the Wood Stork Key for South Florida dated May 2010. Review of the key resulted in the following sequential determination: A > B > C > E = not likely to adversely affect the wood stork.
Florida Scrub Jay: The project corridor is located within the USFWS Consultation Area for the Florida scrub jay. This species typically inhabits fire-dominated, low-growing, oak scrub habitat found on well-drained sandy soils and may persist in areas with sparser oaks or scrub areas that are overgrown. Suitable habitat for this species is not present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed project corridor. Therefore, the Corps has determined that the project will have no effect on the Florida scrub jay.
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH): This notice initiates consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service on EFH as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1996. Our initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or federally managed fisheries in the receiving waters of Old Tampa Bay. Our final determination relative to project impacts and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.
NOTE: This public notice is being issued based on information furnished by the applicants. This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program. The jurisdictional line has not been verified by Corps personnel.
AUTHORIZATION FROM OTHER AGENCIES: Water Quality Certification may be required from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and/or one of the state Water Management Districts.
COMMENTS regarding the potential authorization of the work proposed should be submitted in writing to the attention of the District Engineer at the Palm Beach Gardens Office, 4400 PGA Boulevard, Suite 500, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410-6557 within 21 days from the date of this notice.
The decision whether to issue or deny this permit application will be based on the information received from this public notice and the evaluation of the probable impact to the associated wetlands. This is based on an analysis of the applicants’ avoidance and minimization efforts for the project, as well as the compensatory mitigation proposed.
QUESTIONS concerning this application should be directed to the project manager, Mrs. Tarrie Ostrofsky, in writing at the Palm Beach Gardens Office, 4400 PGA Boulevard, Suite 500, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410-6557, by electronic mail at Tarrie.L.Ostrofsky@usace.army.mil, by fax at (561) 626-6971, or by telephone at (561) 472-3519.
IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Marine Fisheries Services, and other Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental groups, and concerned citizens generally yields pertinent environmental information that is instrumental in determining the impact the proposed action will have on the natural resources of the area.
EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefits, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including cumulative impacts thereof; among these are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historical properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food, and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act or the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. A permit will be granted unless its issuance is found to be contrary to the public interest.
The US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other Interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this determination, comments are used to assess impacts to endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY: In Florida, the State approval constitutes compliance with the approved Coastal Zone Management Plan. In Puerto Rico, a Coastal Zone Management Consistency Concurrence is required from the Puerto Rico Planning Board. In the Virgin Islands, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources permit constitutes compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Plan.
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING: Any person may request a public hearing. The request must be submitted in writing to the District Engineer within the designated comment period of the notice and must state the specific reasons for requesting the public hearing.