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) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. §403) as described below:
APPLICANT: City of Miami Beach
c/o Eric Carpenter
1700 Convention Center Drive
Miami Beach, Florida 33139
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the United States associated with Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve. The project site is located at Maurice Gibbs Memorial Park, 1700 Purdy Avenue, in Section 33, Township 53, Range 42, Miami-Dade County, Miami Beach, Florida 33139.
Directions to the site are as follows: Take Venetian Causeway from Miami towards Miami Beach, turn left onto Purdy Ave., Arrive at 1700 Purdy Ave., on the left.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 25.792567°
Basic: Redesign of a waterfront park by installing retaining wall or new seawall in front of the existing seawall, adding two fishing piers, an overlook platform, two lookouts and a mangrove planter.
Overall: Redesign of a waterfront park by installing a new retaining wall or seawall in front of the existing seawall, adding two fishing piers, an overlook platform, two lookouts and a mangrove planter in Miami-Dade County.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The site is an existing waterfront park-Maurice Gibbs Memorial Park (approximately 2 acres in total), stabilized with a seawall and/or rip rap. On-site saltwater wetland vegetation is dominated by Red Mangrove. In-water resources consist of 1% to 15% Paddlegrass (Halo decipiens), non-listed coral, sponges, other invertebrates including Spiny Lobster and several non-listed fish species.
PROPOSED WORK: To redevelop 544.7 linear feet of waterfront:
From north to south
1) 0 ft. to 153 ft. existing stepped seawall- Install retaining wall with tiebacks landward of the existing seawall and add two steps to the stepped seawall to reach an elevation of +5.7 feet NAVD at the top step of the retaining wall. Install two 70.69 square foot triangular lookouts with railings.
2) 153 ft. to 264 ft. existing seawall- Install a new seawall within 18 inches waterward of the existing seawall. Install two elbow shaped, fishing piers with railing, one consisting of 693.65 square feet (254.65 sq. ft.) walkway and (439 sq. ft.) platform and the other consisting of a 73.62 square feet (294.62 sq. ft.) walkway and (443 sq. ft.) platform.3) 264 ft. to 285.5 ft. existing rip rap- Install a new 21.5 linear foot seawall landward of the existing rip rap.
4) 285.5 ft. to 479.7 ft. existing boardwalk- Install a two-stepped seawall landward of the existing rip rap. The existing boardwalk will be removed. Install a new 708.66 square foot overlook plat form with a (394.26 sq. ft.) walkway to a (314.4 sq. ft.) hexagon shaped terminal platform. The mangroves in this area will remain.
5) 479.7 ft. to 544.7 ft. southern portion of the park: Install a two-stepped landward retaining wall, cutting into the uplands to allow for a mangrove planter area, extending the living mangrove shoreline. The majority of the existing seawall at the southern end of the park will be cut down to allow for the flow of water to the mangrove planters. The 65 foot retaining wall will connect the new seawall to the end of the existing seawall at the southern end of the park.
Turbidity curtains will be installed before construction and will remain until all turbidity subsides.
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 overwater structures have been designed with the marine resources in mind and have been placed to avoid all seagrass. Additionally, the existing mangroves found landward of the boardwalk area will not be impacted.”
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION –The applicant has provided the following explanation why compensatory mitigation should not be required:
“No marine resources are anticipated to be impacted. In addition, mangroves will be planted and will increase function of the aquatic environment.”
CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps is aware of historic property/properties within or in close proximity of the permit area. The plans include intensive ground disturbances on the landward side of the old bulkhead in order to construct a new bulkhead. The property has never been subject to an archaeological survey and there is potential (provided that the land here was not created from fill, which cannot be confirmed from past maps and aerials) for unrecorded arcaheological sites. Therefore a CRAS of the project footprint, including staging areas for the project, must be completed prior to the Corps making a determination of effect under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for the project.
ENDANGERED SPECIES: The Corps has determined the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the West Indian Manatee (Trichechusmanatus), green sea turtles (Cheloniamydas), loggerhead sea turtles (Carettacaretta), hawksbill sea turtles (Eretmochelysimbricata), kemps ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelyskempii), leatherback sea turtles (Dermochelyscoriacea), Nassau grouper (Epinephelusstriatus) and smalltooth sawfish (Pristispectinata or its designated critical habitat. The Corps will request U.S. Fish and Wildlife/National Marine Fisheries Service concurrence with this determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
The Corps has determined the proposal may affect the Johnson’s seagrass (Halophila johnsonii) designated critical habitat. The Corps will request initiation of formal consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service/National Marine Fisheries Service pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act by separate letter.
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.The proposal would impact approximately 2,385.6 sq. ft. (0.055 acres) of habitat utilized by various life stages of Coastal Migratory Pelagics, Coral, Shrimp, Snapper Grouper, and Spiny Lobster. Our initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or Federally managed fisheries in the Biscayne 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 applicant. This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program. The jurisdictional line [has/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 theMiami Permits Section, 9900 SW 107th Ave, Miami, Florida 33143 within 30 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, Luis Betancourt, in writing at the Miami Permits Section, 9900 SW 107th Ave., Miami, Florida; by electronic mail at Luis.email@example.com; or, by telephone at (305)779-6053.
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.