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: Greg Davis
Powerline Golf, Inc.
PO Box 511088
Melbourne Beach, FL 32951
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the United States associated with the Indian River. The project site is located at 13005 Indian River Drive, Sebastian, Indian River County, Florida 32958 in Section 31, Township 30S, Range 39E.
Directions to the site are as follows: Site is approximately 0.15 miles east of US 1 in Sebastian FL. Travel east along Jackson Street then north along Old Dixie Highway. The site is on the east side of Old Dixie Highway.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 27.832485°
Longitude -80.47723°
PROJECT PURPOSE:
Basic: Residential Development
Overall: Provide residential housing in Indian River County with easy access north and south bound along major roadways, with proximity to barrier islands and beaches.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The wetland system consists of a 0.56 acres freshwater system. The onsite vegetation consists of mostly herbaceous wetlands of low quality. The existing area surrounding the project area consists of low-density residential development to the north and south and is bracketed on the east and west by roadways and more low density residential development.
PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to fill 0.56 acres of waters of the United State to facilitate the construction of a residential development consisting of 19 prefabricated modular home unites with driveways, road access, utilities, and associated appurtenances.
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:
“Due to the size of the lot and building constraints, minimization and avoidance is not possible.”
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant has offered the following compensatory mitigation plan to offset unavoidable functional loss to the aquatic environment:
“Mitigation will be completed by purchasing 0.21 herbaceous wetland credits at Basin 22 Mitigation Bank.”
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 the following species or 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.
Florida Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) – This site falls within the consultation area of the Florida Scrub-Jay. Suitable habitats for the scrub-jay are not only the more “classic” xeric oak scrub, scrubby pine flatwoods, scrubby coastal strand, and sand pine scrub, but also include (FLUCCS code in parentheses): improved, unimproved, and woodland pastures (211-213); citrus groves (221); rangeland (310-330); pine flatwoods (441); longleaf pine xeric oak (412); sand pine (413); sand pine plantations (4411); forest regeneration areas (443); sand other than beaches (720); disturbed rural land in transition without positive indicators of intended activity (741); and disturbed burned areas (745). The presence of scrub oaks, no matter how sparsely distributed, is a key indicator of “scrub” habitat. Fitzpatrick et al. (1991) defined three classes of scrub-jay habitat: Type I – any upland plant community in which percent cover of the substrate by scrub oak species is 15 percent or more. Type II – any plant community, not meeting the definition of type I habitat, in which one or more scrub oak species is represented. Type III – any upland or seasonally dry wetland within 400 m (0.25 mi) of any area designated as Type I or II habitats. The project site includes some improved pasture which Florida Scrub-jays have been known to forage in. However, it does not meet the criteria of a Type I, II, or III habitats as described above. Therefore based on the Standard Local Operating Procedures of Endangered Species (SLOPES) and other information as cited above the Corps has determined that the project will not jeopardize the continued existence of this species or adversely modify any critical habitat for the Scrub Jay and therefore in accordance with Sections 7(a)-(d) [U.S.C. 1536(a)-(d)] of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended (“Act”) the Corps has determined a No Effect for the Scrub Jay.
Wood Stork (Mycteria americana) – The Corps completed an evaluation of the project based upon the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) South Florida Ecological Services Field Offices Programmatic Concurrence for use with the Wood Stork (May 2010). Use of the Key for Wood Stork resulted in the following sequential determination: A (Project impacts SFH at a location greater than 0.47 miles from a colony site) > B (Project impact to SFH is less than 0.5 acres) = “May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect”. The Corps has U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurrence for the proposed activities through use of the aforementioned determination key. No further action is required.
Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon couperi) – Eastern Indigo Snakes have not been observed on the site and occurrence is considered unlikely. However, they have potential to occur based on the presence of mix of habitats on the site. Using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Eastern Indigo Snake Programmatic Effect Determination Key – Revised” (August 2017): A (project not located in salt marsh) > B (Use Standard Protection Measures) > C (There are gopher tortoise burrows, holes, cavities, or other refugia) > D (Project will impact less than 25 acres of Xeric habitat) > E (Permit conditions for removal of snakes if encountered) > “May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect.
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 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 the Cocoa Permits Section, 400 High Point Dr., Cocoa, Florida, 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, Corey Maier, in writing at the Cocoa Permits Section, 400 High Point Dr., Cocoa, Florida, 32926; by electronic mail at corey.m.maier@usace.army.mil; or, by telephone at (321) 504-3771 ext. 15.
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.