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: Minto Sabal Bay, LLC
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project, referred to as Fleischmann Parcel, would affect waters of the United States, including wetlands, associated with the Rookery Bay Watershed, West Collier Drainage Basin. The project site is located in Sections 23 and 26, Township 50 South, and Range 25 East, Naples, Collier County. The project is located southeast of the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Holly Avenue, approximately 0.75 mile south of Thomasson Drive.
Directions to the site are as follows: From Exit 101 on Interstate 75, proceed approximately 3.4 miles south on County Road 951. Turn right on Rattlesnake Hammock Road and proceed 7 miles to Bayshore Drive. Turn left and proceed 0.75 mile south.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES:
Latitude 26.094988°
Longitude -81.767949°
PROJECT PURPOSE:
Basic: Residential development.
Overall: To build a master planned residential development, near Naples, in south Collier County, Florida.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The 103 acre site contains 53.7 acres of wetlands and 0.1 acre of other surface waters. The wetlands consist of disturbed cypress, pine, shrub, and mangrove. The other surface waters consist of drainage canal.
The property is surrounded to the north and east by Isles of Collier Preserve residential development. The property is bordered to the south and west by undeveloped land. The Avalon Outfall Canal borders the east side of the project.
Vegetation mapping for the property was completed by Passarella and Associates, Inc. (PAI) in July 2019 utilizing the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) Level IV. AutoCAD Map 3D 2017 software was used to determine the acreage of each mapping area, produce summaries, and generate the final FLUCFCS map for the Project site.
A brief description of the vegetation communities identified within each FLUCFCS code follows.
Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (50-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Codes 4119 E3-E4)
The canopy vegetation is slash pine (Pinus elliottii) with widely scattered melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia) and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). The sub-canopy includes cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), myrsine (Myrsine cubana), dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia), downy rose-myrtle (Rhodomyrtus tomentosa), staggerbush (Lyonia fruticosa), and gallberry (Ilex glabra). The sub-canopy in scattered higher elevation areas contains sand live oak (Quercus geminata) and myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia). The ground cover includes downy rose-myrtle, Brazilian pepper, saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum), greenbriar (Smilax sp.), grapevine (Vitis rotundifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), love vine (Cassytha filiformis), gopher apple (Licania michauxii), running oak (Quercus pumila), and yellow-eyed grass (Xyris sp.). Coverage of exotics exceeds 75 percent in areas mapped as E4.
Drainage Canal (FLUCFCS Code 514)
These excavated other surface water areas are open water shaded by a canopy of melaleuca, downy rose-myrtle, and Brazilian pepper.
Mangrove Swamps, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6129 E1)
The canopy and sub-canopy vegetation include white mangroves (Laguncularia racemosa), black mangroves (Avicennia germinans), buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus), melaleuca, and Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia). The ground cover includes needle rush (Juncus roemerianus), saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), morning glory (Ipomea sp.), umbrella sedge (Fuirena scirpoidea), and saltwort (Batis maritima).
Mangrove Swamps, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6129 E3)
The canopy and sub-canopy vegetation include buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus), melaleuca, cabbage palm, Brazilian pepper, white mangroves, and black mangroves. The ground cover includes saltgrass and white indigo berry (Randea aculeata).
Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (Exotics 50-100%) (FLUCFCS Codes 6249 E3-E4)
The canopy consists of slash pine, melaleuca, cypress (Taxodium distichum), and cabbage palm. The sub-canopy contains downy rose-myrtle, cabbage palm, cocoplum (Chrysobalanus icaco), wax myrtle, swamp bay (Persea palustris), melaleuca, Brazilian pepper, and myrsine. The ground cover includes gulfdune paspalum (Paspalum monostachyum), swamp fern, sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), grapevine, swamp lily (Crinum americanum), Old world climbing fern (Lygodium microphyllum), poison ivy, and cabbage palm. Coverage of exotics exceeds 75 percent in areas mapped as E4.
Pine, Hydric, Disturbed (50-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Codes 6259 E3-E4)
The canopy consists of slash pine and melaleuca with some scattered cabbage palm and cypress. The sub-canopy contains slash pine, wax myrtle, myrsine, dahoon holly, swamp bay, saltbush (Baccharis halimifolia), melaleuca, downy rose-myrtle, cypress, cocoplum, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover includes gulfdune paspalum, swamp fern, sawgrass, snowberry (Chiococca alba), poison ivy, bracken fern, Old world climbing fern, yellow-eyed grass, grapevine, greenbriar, bantam buttons (Syngonanthus flavidulus), and rush fuirena (Fuirena cirpoidea). Coverage of exotics exceeds 75 percent in areas mapped as E4.
Wetland Shrub, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6319 E3)
The canopy and sub-canopy vegetation includes buttonwood (Conocarpus erectus), melaleuca, cabbage palm, and Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia). The ground cover is dominated by saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), with scattered spikerush (Eleocharis sp.), saltwort, sand cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), needle rush, leather fern (Acrostichum aureum), and glasswort (Salicornia virginica).
PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to construct a residential development with associated infrastructure, amenities, and stormwater management system. The proposed project will result in the discharge of 169,077 cubic yards of fill material into 26.2 acres of wetlands and 839 cubic yards of fill material into 0.13 acre of other surface waters. The proposed project will also excavate 72,213 cubic yards of material from 7.46 acres of wetlands.
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: To avoid impacts to high natural resource value lands, the project directs development towards lands with less environmental habitat value. The site plan was designed to utilize existing disturbed upland and low-quality wetland habitats and avoid direct and secondary impacts to on-site high quality natural wetland habitats including mangrove. In addition, the applicant avoids developing near existing conservation lands located south of the project.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant has offered the following compensatory mitigation plan to offset unavoidable functional loss to the aquatic environment: In order to offset the loss of wetland functions, the applicant proposes on-site preservation and enhancement of wetlands and uplands. The preservation area contains important habitat for a variety of plant and wildlife species and is located proximate to Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. The compensatory mitigation area would be placed in a conservation easement dedicated to the South Florida Water Management District with third party enforcement rights granted to the Corps.
CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps is not aware of any known historic properties within the permit area. A cultural resource assessment survey has been completed by the applicant. 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 project site is located in an area where the eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) may occur. A species survey conducted of the project site, by the applicant’s agent, did not reveal the presence of any eastern indigo snakes, however potential refugia were identified in the form of gopher tortoise burrows. The permit instrument, if issued, would contain the Standard Protective Measures for Eastern Indigo Snake which must be followed during all construction activities. In following the Indigo Snake Programmatic Concurrence Key (dated August 1, 2017), the proposal keys out to A>B>C> “may affect”. The applicant has committed to a plan of mitigation that will enhance and preserve land that can provide habitat support for the eastern indigo snake. The Corps determined the proposed project “may affect” the eastern indigo snake and will request formal consultation on this species from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) via a separate letter.
The project site supports Suitable Foraging Habitat for the wood stork, but is not located within a wood stork (Mycteria americana) core foraging area. The applicant has committed to a plan of mitigation that will enhance and preserve over 20 acres of land that can provide habitat support for the wood stork. The Corps completed an evaluation of the project based upon the FWS Wood Stork Effect Determination Key. Use of the key resulted in the following sequential determination: A>B>C>D> “not likely to adversely affect”. Although the project will directly impact potential wood stork foraging habitat, replacement compensation is proposed in accordance with Clean Water Act 404(b)(1) guidelines, the habitat compensation replaces foraging value consisting of wetland enhancement and restoration matching the hydroperiod of wetlands affected, and replacement compensation provides foraging value similar to, or higher than, that of impacted wetlands; therefore, the Corps determined that the project “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” (MANLAA), the wood stork and will request concurrence from the FWS via a separate letter.
The Project is located approximately 0.5 mile outside of the Consultation Area for the red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) (Picoides borealis). No RCWs or cavities in live pine trees have been documented on or near the site during the listed species survey or other fieldwork conducted on the Project site. The Corps has determined the proposed project “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect”, the RCW. This determination is based on the use of the FWS draft Species Conservation Guidelines, South Florida for the RCW (July 12, 2004). According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission database, the nearest documented historic record of red-cockaded woodpeckers is approximately 3.5 miles northeast of the Project site. No further action is required.
The Project occurs within a FWS Consultation Area for the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens). The Florida scrub jay lives only in scrub and scrubby flatwoods habitats found on nearly pure, excessively well-drained, sandy soils. Scrub jay habitat is dominated by a layer of evergreen oaks [myrtle oak (Quercus myrtifolia) and/or Archbold oak (Q. inopina), sand live oak (Q. geminate), Chapman oak (Q. chapmanii), and runner oak (Q. minima)], rusty lyonia (Lyonia ferruginea), and Florida rosemary (Ceratiola ericoides). Ground cover is sparse, dominated by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) and sand palmetto (S. etonia) (http://www.fws.gov/northflorida//Species-Accounts/Fla-Scrub-Jay-2005.htm 10/22/2015). The project site does not contain suitable Florida scrub jay habitat. Surveys conducted by the applicant found no use of the project site by Florida scrub jay. According to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission database, the nearest documented historic record of Florida scrub jay is approximately 5 miles southeast of the Project site. The Corps determination is that the proposal will have “no effect” on the scrub jay.
The Project site is located within a FWS designated consultation area for the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) (FBB). The applicant has conducted a FBB roost and acoustic survey of the Project area. No Florida bonneted bats or their sign were detected during the survey. Both the roost and acoustic survey were negative for the presence of FBB. The Corps utilized the October 2019 FBB Consultation Guideline Key, resulted in the following sequential determination 1a>2a>3b>6>7>10>12a>LAA preliminary determination. However the onsite species survey indicates that there are no FBB onsite, therefore the Corps determination is “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect”, and will request formal consultation from the FWS via a separate letter.
The Project site is located over 6 miles outside of the nearest FWS designated Focus Area for the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi). Panther telemetry has been reported within one mile of the Project site. There have been no panther vehicular collisions reported on roadways adjacent to the site, however the increase in homes will have an increase in traffic. Using the Florida Panther Effect Determination Key (February 19, 2007), the proposal keyed as follows: A > B> May Effect. The Corps will request formal consultation on this species from the FWS via a separate letter.
The Corps has made the determination of MANLAA for the American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) and its designated critical habitat. American crocodile nests occurring near the Marco Island Airport, approximately 9 miles to the southeast of this project. The Corps will request informal consultation on this species from the FWS via a 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 project would only impact freshwater wetlands; therefore, the Corps has determined that no substantial adverse impacts to EFH or Federally managed fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico will result from the proposed action. 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.
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 above address 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, Allison Murphy, in writing at the Fort Myers Permits Section, 1520 Royal Palm Square Blvd, Fort Myers, FL 33919; by electronic mail at 1520 Royal Palm Square Blvd, Suite 310, Fort Myers, FL 33919; or, by telephone at (239) 334-1975.
IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Coordination with the FWS, the 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, aesthetics, 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 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.