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 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. §403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1344) as described below:
APPLICANT: 360 Capital Management, LLC
Ms. Natalie Bowden
711 Westchester Avenue
White Plains, NY 10604
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the United States associated with the Halifax River Hydrologic Basin (Rose Bay-Spruce Creek Frontal 10-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (0308020101)). The project site is located east of US 1 and south of Reed Canal, at 2941 South Ridgewood Ave, in Sections 33 and 34, Township 15S, Range 33E, South Daytona, Volusia County, Florida.
Directions to the site are as follows: From the intersection of I-95 and Dunlawton Blvd., travel east on Dunlawton Blvd to US 1 and turn north, travel north on US 1 approximately 0.8 miles to site on the east side of the road.
PERMIT HISTORY: The Corps previously issued a permit to Villa Casa Blanca, LLC for this parcel on October 10, 2006, which expired on October 3, 2011. The proposed work was not started, and no wetland impacts occurred. However, a portion of the mitigation for the project was completed, which consisted of wetlands (mangrove/saltmarsh) creation at Gamble Rogers State Park. The 9.5 acre mitigation area has been reviewed and considered successful, meeting all the success criteria stipulated in the previous permit. Prior to the Villa Casa Blanca, LLC permit in 2006, two single family home sites and a borrow area existed onsite. The home sites have been demolished and the borrow area vacated. The area is now vacant and overgrown with exotic species.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES:
Latitude 29.15656°
Longitude -80.99258°
PROJECT PURPOSE:
Basic: Multi-family Residential Development.
Overall: Multi-family Residential Development along the Halifax River in Daytona Beach area in Volusia County.
PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to fill 1.37 acres of waters of the United States (0.84 acres – wetlands; 0.53 acres – surface waters) to construct a multi-family residential development. The construction includes building, parking, stormwater management ponds, and infrastructure.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The project area currently includes the following land use types/vegetative communities:
Undeveloped Land within Urban Areas (191) – There are two areas of undeveloped land present on the property. These areas were previously developed but all of the structures on site with the exception of a dock and boat ramp have been removed. The area is currently cleared, mowed and reinforced by seawalls on the northern and southern boundaries of the pond and wetland. The dominant vegetative community is an herbaceous grass community that consists primarily of bahai grass (Paspalum notatum) and ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia).
Brazilian Pepper (422) – The forested area on the northern half of the property has a dominant tree community of Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius). Other contributing tree species include scattered red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), cabbage palmetto (Sabal palmetto), sugarberry (Celtis laevigata), sand live oak (Quercus geminata), and white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa) around the pond. Shrub species include sea oxeye (Borrichia frutescens), seaside heterotrope (Heliotropium curassavicum), and salt myrtle (Baccharis halimifolia).
Streams and Waterways (510) – The property directly abuts the Halifax River, part of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway system. It is a marine, tidally influenced waterway with a shoreline vegetative community that consists primarily of red mangroves (Rhizophora mangle) and black mangroves (Avicennia germinans).
Reservoir (530) — An artificial pond is located in the northern half of the property that is a rectangular pond with steep banks that appears to be a former borrow pit. The pond is filled with saltwater that connects with the Halifax River only under storm conditions. The banks of the pond are sharp and lined with Brazilian pepper, black mangroves and white mangroves.
Mangrove Swamps (612) – This classification describes a number of small stands of black mangrove and red mangrove in which these two species make up the dominant vegetation. These stands are interspersed within the salt marsh system and are associated with the margin between the exotic wetland hardwoods and salt marsh located at the south end of the project site.
Exotic Wetland Hardwoods (619) – The wetland area contains of a mixture of wetland tree species and is located on the south half of the property. The outer margin of the habitat contains a mixture of Brazilian pepper, Walter’s viburnum (Viburnum obovatum), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), cabbage palmetto and red cedar. The interior consists of a mixture of the species listed above interspersed with white mangrove, black mangrove, and red mangrove.
Saltwater Marshes (642) – Saltmarsh is located in the interior of the wetlands in the southern half of the property. The saltmarsh consists of saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alternifloria), black needle rush (Juncus romarianus) white mangrove, saltwort (Batis maritima), glasswort (Salicornia ambigua), Christmas berry (Lycium carolinianum), salt bush (Atriplex pentandra), and Brazilian pepper.
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:
“The US 1 South Daytona site, formerly Villa Casa Blanca, was originally permitted in 2005 by SJRWMD under ERP 99100-01 for impacts to 2.27 acres of wetlands, and 0.53 acres of surface waters resulting in total impacts to 2.8 acres. All mitigation was to take place off site at Gamble Rogers Park in Flagler County, and was listed as restoration activities to 9.47 acres of area within Gamble Rogers Park.
In order to federally permit the site, the USACE requested avoidance and minimization measures which resulted in a reduction in wetland impacts and additional mitigation measures including on-site restoration, and preservation. Following this avoidance and minimization effort, the USACE issued Individual Permit (IP) # SAJ-2005-5399 (IP-TB) which reduced wetland impacts to 1.47 acres along with the original 0.53 acres of surface waters for a total impact to 2.0 acres. The USACE IP included onsite mitigation activities which included 0.53 acres of wetland restoration, and 0.97 acres of onsite wetland preservation. The total off-site mitigation activities included 9.47 acres of creation, and 0.42 acres or wetland restoration. The SJRWMD 99100-02 permit was then modified to include the minimization efforts achieved in the USACE IP, but didn’t include the onsite mitigation.
The USACE IP was initially authorized in 2006 but was allowed to expire. The property has since changed hands and the new owner wants to re-permit the property as it was before. Upon review of the site for re-permitting, the USACE determined that the conditions the site was originally permitted under were no longer acceptable. USACE has asked that the plans be revised to reduce wetland impacts, and that all mitigation needs be satisfied by the offsite mitigation. Reasoning for this included the risk of restoration site failure, and the additional costs associated with continued on site monitoring.
In an effort to comply with all of the requests posed and the ability to mitigate for all wetland mitigation impacts associated with the project, the plans were redesigned to further reduce wetland impacts on site. The redesigned site will result in wetland impacts to 0.84 acres, a 38% reduction in wetland impacts from the previously issued permit. The current plans will impact wetlands 1 and 2 but only have secondary impacts to wetland 3. Direct impacts will include 0.33 acres of impacts to Wetland 1, and 0.51 acres of impacts to Wetland 2 (low quality Brazilian pepper). The surface water on-site of 0.53 acres will still be impacted”.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION: The applicant has offered the following compensatory mitigation plan to offset unavoidable functional loss to the aquatic environment:
“The project mitigation has already been completed and is comprised entirely of off-site mitigation located at Gamble Rogers State Park in Flagler County. The off-site mitigation includes 9.47 acres of wetland creation of saltmarsh (FLUCFCS 642), and 0.42 acres of wetland enhancement of salt marsh as well.
The final wetland monitoring report was completed in January of 2017 and was submitted to the USACE in the current IP application package. A review of the offsite mitigation area was conducted by the USACE and Zev Cohen and Associates on 10/13/17. The review found that all of the success criteria proposed in the mitigation plan were met and the site was determined to be successful by the USACE.”
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 adversely affect, wood stork (Mycteria americana) and Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi).
The proposed activity is not within the Core Foraging Area (CFA) of a wood stork rookery; the project supports Suitable Foraging Habitat (SFH) for wood stork. Based on the Effect Determination Key for the Wood Stork in Central and North Peninsular Florida (dated September 2008), the Corps determination sequence was A>B>C>D>E = “may affect but is not likely to adversely affect”. The determination is supported by SFH compensation provided within the mitigation, and provides an amount of habitat and foraging function equivalent to that of impacted SFH; and is not contrary to the Service’s “Habitat Management Guidelines for the Wood Stork in the Southeast Region”. No further consultation is required.
Based on the Eastern Indigo Snake Effect Determination Key (dated January 25, 2010; August 13, 2013 Addendum), the Corps determination sequence resulted in A>B>C = “may affect but is not likely to adversely affect”. This determination is based on the project not being located in open water, the applicant adhering to the “Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake” (dated August 12, 2013) and the absence of gopher tortoise, holes, and refugia within the work area where a snake could be buried or trapped and injured during project activities. No further consultation is required.
The Corps has determined the proposal would have no effect on any other listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat.
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. 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 applicant. 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 is required from the SJRWMD.
COMMENTS regarding the potential authorization of the work proposed should be submitted in writing to the attention of the District through the Cocoa Permits Section, 400 High Point Drive, Suite 600, Cocoa, FL 32926 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 applicant's 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, John Palmer, in writing at the Cocoa Permits Section, 400 High Point Drive, Suite 600, Cocoa, FL 32926, by electronic mail at John.Palmer@usace.army.mil, by fax at (321) 504-3803, or by telephone at (321) 504-3771, extension 10.
IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Preliminary review of this application indicates that an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. 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. By means of this notice, we are soliciting comments on the potential effects of the project on threatened or endangered species or their habitat
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 of 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 decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act 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.