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 (FDOT) – District 7
Attn: Ms. Virginia Creighton
11201 N. McKinley Drive
Tampa, Florida 33612
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the U.S. (wetlands and surface waters) associated with the Anclote River that becomes a Traditional Navigable Water downstream near its flow into the Gulf of Mexico. The project is located along approximately 2.3 miles of SR 45 (US 41) from north of Connerton Boulevard to south of SR 52 in Sections 9, 15, 16, and 22, Township 25 South, Range 18 East, Pasco County, Florida.
Directions to the site from Tampa are as follows: From the Intersection of I-275 and I-4, take I-275 north for approximately 8.5 miles. Take exit 53 for Bearss Avenue for 0.2 mile and keep right at the fork and merge onto FL 678 East/East Bearss Ave for approximately 0.2 mile. Turn left onto US 41 North and proceed approximately 15 miles to the start of the project.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 28.302553°
Longitude -82.497195°
PROJECT PURPOSE
Basic: Linear transportation improvements.Overall: The overall project purpose is to construct roadway improvements within the SR 45 (US 41) corridor to enhance traffic movement for current and projected growth, improve public safety, and accommodate all modes of vehicular transportation in west central Pasco County.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The existing SR 45 (US 41) corridor consists of an existing two (2) lane roadway. The land uses were classified according to the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) (FDOT, 1999). There are 16 mapped land uses within the 90.85 acre project limits as delineated by the existing right-of-way boundaries for the project limits, and off-site ponds. The right-of-way land use is transportation (810) and adjacent land uses are predominately residential low density, less than 2 dwelling units per acre (110), residential medium density, 2 and less than 5 dwelling units per acre (120), open land (190), cropland and pasture land (210), specialty farms (250), and upland hardwood conifer mixed (434). Existing land use for the proposed pond sites are either predominately in agricultural uses, open land, or hardwood conifer mixed. Following construction, land areas within the pond boundaries will function as part of the roadway drainage system (i.e. stormwater management facilities) or as floodplain compensation sites.The wetland and surface waters within the 90.85 project area consist of freshwater marsh (641), wet prairies (643) hardwood forests (610), cypress (621), and (510) streams and waterways. These wetlands are classified according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the U.S. as palustrine emergent and forested wetlands.
FLUCFCS 641 and 643: Medium to low quality wetlands. These wetlands are vegetated with herbaceous wetland species consisting of maidencane (Panicum hemitimon), bog button (Lachnocaulon anceps), meadow beauty (Rhexia spp.), pipewort (Eriocaulon compressum), redroot (Lachnanthes caroliniana) Ludwigia repens, sedges (Carex spp.), licorice weed (Scoparia dulcis), broom sedge (Andropogon virginiana and A. glomeratus), fleabane (Erigeron sp.), bristly thistle (Circium horridulum), carpet grass (Axonopus sp.), Elliott’s love grass (Eragrostis elliottii), and bristle grass (Setaria geniculata). Occasional trees within the wetland include red maple (Acer rubrum), red bay (Persea borbonia), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) and Carolina willow (salix caroliniana). A depressional wetland located on the east side of US 41 has been substantially impacted by utility work and in areas remain un-vegetated.
FLUCFCS 610 and 621: Medium to high quality wetlands. The remaining wetlands within the project area consist of wetland hardwood forests (610) and cypress (621). The USFWS classification is palustrine forested wetlands. These wetlands consist of red maple, primrose willow (Ludwigia octovalvis and L. peruviana), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), buttonbush, Carolina willow, laurel oak and slash pine (Pinus elliottii), red top panicum (Panicum rigidulum), shield fern (Thylepteris spp.), cypress (Taxodium distichum), American elm (Ulmus americana), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), salt bush (Baccharis halimifolia), dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), cherry laurel (Prunus caroliniana), Virginia willow (Itea virginica), cordgrass, royal fern (Osmunda regalis), torpedo grass (Panicum repens), saw grass (Cladium jamaicense), broomsedge (Andropogon glomeratus), maidencane, duck potato (Sagittaria lancifolia), St. Augustine grass (Stenotaphrum secundatum), red root, St. John’s wort (Hypericum spp.), and pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata).
FLUCFCS (510): No wetland function. The USFWS classification is palustrine emergent, seasonally flooded, excavated wetlands. These surface waters are shallow roadside conveyance ditches that direct roadway runoff to lateral drains and cross drains associated with the US 41 roadway. Soils are mapped as Narcoossee fine sand in these locations, which is not listed as hydric. Vegetation is routinely mowed and occasionally disturbed by maintenance activities. Dominant vegetation is bahiagrass on the slopes while the bottom supports a variety of other species such as day flower, dollar weed, soft rush, and primrose. These are upland-cut, man-made drainage ditches that provide no wetland function and do not provide suitable foraging habitat (SFH) for the wood stork.
FLUCFCS (510): Medium quality surface water. The USFWS classification is palustrine emergent, Unconsolidated Bottom, Mud, Permanently Flooded, Excavated wetlands. This surface water has the appearance of a small borrow pit. Soils are mapped as Smyrna fine sand which is listed as hydric. The slope surrounding the surface water was vegetated with Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica) and bushy broomsedge. Canopy around the excavated portion was American elm and laurel oak. Standing water was present in the surface water and had 100 percent cover by mosquito fern (Azolla caroliniana). SFH is present for the wood stork and impacts to this surface water would require mitigation for SFH.
PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to impact 10.33 acres of waters of the United States (wetlands and surface water) of which 7.97 acres (2.29 acres dredge, 5.54 acres fill, 0.14 acre of permanent clearing) are direct impacts and 2.36 acres are secondary wetland impacts in order to widen approximately 2.3 miles of SR 45 (US 41) from north of Connerton Boulevard to south of SR 52. The FDOT will widen the existing two-lane road to a four-lane road with a grass median, add a 12-foot shared use path on the east side of the road, and construct three off-site stormwater management facilities (FPN 256324-2-52-01).
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION INFORMATION – This project has been designed to avoid and minimize wetlands to the greatest extent practicable. The roadway within the project limits is currently a two-lane, undivided roadway. The proposed roadway will be an interim 4-lane divided roadway with grassed medians, paved shoulders and a 12-foot shared use path (described below). Ultimately, although there is no current timeline, the roadway will be a 6-lane facility. The project has been designed to accommodate the future 6-lanes. Impacts to wetlands and surface waters are almost completely right-of-way to right-of-way along the mainline as a result of roadway slopes. In the future, the roadway will be widened to the median to add the ultimate condition. Avoidance of wetland impacts was not possible. Pond Siting Reports included analyses for pond size and location. Considerations included hydraulic feasibility, soil types, geotechnical considerations, protected species impacts, wetland impacts and mitigation, cultural and historic resources, and parcel impacts. During the course of the pond siting effort, approximately 20 stormwater management facility (SMF) configurations were investigated. The resulting drainage design implements three SMFs, which were chosen to avoid or minimize impacts to environmental, cultural and historic resources, while avoiding contamination issues and providing the best hydrologic connects possible. Wetland impacts were not completely avoided, but were minimized to the extent possible. Of the three SMFs, one completely avoids wetland impacts. Two others in Cypress Preserve have been sized to accommodate US 41 widening.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant proposes to mitigate the assessed functional loss of 10.33 acres (5.08 Uniform Mitigation Assessment Methodology (UMAM) units) of freshwater palustrine emergent and forested wetland impacts in accordance with section 373.4137, Florida Statutes, (F.S.) to satisfy requirements of 33 United States Code 1344.
CULTURAL RESOURCES: 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 (SHPO) and those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area. By letter dated November 20, 2014, the FDOT provided the SHPO a Cultural Resources Assessment Survey (CRAS) and a Historic Resource Survey Update (HRSU) which also included additional field work for proposed Storm Water Facility (SMF) Sites and a drainage easement and three additional SMF alternatives and an additional drainage easement conducted in September 2014. Results of the field survey of eight SMFs and two drainage easements resulted in the identification of no archaeological sites and five historic resources, including four buildings (8PA1679 and 8PA2872 to 8PA2874) and one linear resource group (8PA2828). All were either adjacent or proximate to the SMFs and drainage easements; none within. None of the historic buildings as well as the linear resource is considered potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
Background research and field survey for the HRSU for the mainline corridor resulted in the identification of 16 previously recorded historic resources along the corridor, including 15 buildings and one linear resource (8PA2828). Only eight of the 16 resources (8PA434, 8PA1677, 8PA1679, 8PA1682, 8PA1683, 8PA1685, 8PA1686, and 8PA2828) are extant within the project Area of Potential Effect (APE). Eight additional historic resources (8PA2871 through 8PA2879) were newly identified and recorded. None of the previously recorded or newly recorded historic resources are considered potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP. By document stamp, dated December 29, 2014, SHPO concurred with the survey findings (SHPO/DHR Project File Number 2014-5759.
ENDANGERED SPECIES: The project is located within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) Consultation Areas for wood stork (Mycteria americana), Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) and Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens)
The Corps has determined the proposed project would have no effect on the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) and is not likely to adversely affect the Eastern Indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couper) and wood stork (Mycteria americana).
Florida scrub jay: The Florida scrub-jay lives only in the scrub and scrubby flatwoods habitats of Florida. This type of habitat grows only on nearly pure, excessively well-drained sandy soils, and occurs along present coastlines in Florida, on paleodunes of the high central ridges and other ancient shorelines of the Florida Peninsula, and inland on scattered alluvial deposits bordering several major rivers. This species' habitat is dominated by a layer of evergreen oaks: myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia) and/or Archbold oak (Q. inopina), sand live oak (Q. geminata), Chapman oak (Q. chapmanii), and runner oak (Q. minima)], rusty lyonia (Lyonia ferruginea), and Florida rosemary (Ceratiola ericoides). This layer is rarely greater than two meters in height, except where fire has been suppressed. Ground cover is sparse, dominated by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) and sand palmetto (Sabal etonia). Bare sand patches are essential for foraging and acorn-caching. Slash pines (Pinus elliottii) and sand pines (P. clausa) are widely scattered with usually less than 15 percent cover. The project site, does not contain nesting or foraging habitat for this species. In consideration of this information, the Corps determined that the project would have “no effect” on this species.
Eastern Indigo snake: The potential impacts to the endangered Eastern Indigo snake 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. This is due to the project will impact less than 25 acres of xeric habitat and less than 25 burrows within the project corridor. Also the applicant proposes to follow the FWS approved Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake during the clearing and construction phases of the project.
Wood Stork: This species typically inhabits freshwater and brackish wetlands, primarily nesting in cypress and mangrove swamps. They can be found foraging in shallow water in freshwater marshes, wet prairies, narrow tidal creeks, and flooded tidal pools, as well as roadside ditches and pasturelands. The proposed project is within the buffer of 10 wood stork nesting colonies. The nearest colony, Heron Point – Land O’ Lakes, is located approximately 6.1 miles southeast of the project area. There are no documented historic occurrences of the Wood Stork within the project area and none were observed during field reviews; however, wetlands and some surface waters within the project area provide SFH. The proposed project would impact greater than 0.5 acre of wetlands and surface waters which exhibit the parameters of suitable foraging habitat for the wood stork. Based upon review of the Wood Stork Key for South Florida, dated May 18, 2010, the proposed project resulted in the following sequential determination: A > B > C > D > E = “not likely to adversely affect” the wood stork. This is due to the applicant proposing to provide mitigation in accordance with the Clean Water Act section 404(b)(1) for habitat compensation within the appropriate CFA or within the service area of a Service-approved mitigation bank. Given the above information, the Corps has determined that the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the wood stork.
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 unnamed wetlands. 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 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 through the Panama City Permits Section, Post Office Box 4970, Jacksonville, Florida 32232 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, Mr. Randy Turner, in writing at the Jacksonville Permits Section, Post Office Box 4970, Jacksonville, Florida 32232, by electronic mail at Randy.L.Turner@usace.army.mil, by fax at (904) 232-1904, or by telephone at (904) 232-1670.
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.