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: Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU)
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect aquatic resources associated with wetlands adjacent to the Sweetwater Branch Creek. The project site is located at the existing Main Street Water Reclamation Facility (MSWRF) in the city of Gainesville, Alachua County, Florida.
Directions to the site are as follows: From Interstate 75, turn east at Exit 382 onto SW Williston Road (FL-121/FL-331) toward Gainesville/Waldo. Continue on SW Williston Rd for 3.6 miles and then turn left onto SE 16th Avenue. In 0.4 miles, the destination is on the right.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 29.636667
Longitude -82.2350
PROJECT PURPOSE:
Basic: The basic project purpose is wastewater treatment and is not considered water dependent.
Overall: The overall project purpose is to manage stormwater runoff at the MSWRF associated with a planned treatment capacity expansion (MSWRF Capacity and Renewal Upgrade project).
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The MSWRF was originally constructed prior to the 1950’s and discharges an average permitted capacity of 7.5 million gallons per day of treated effluent to the adjacent Sweetwater Branch Creek. This makes up the bulk of the Sweetwater Branch’s flow, which ultimately discharges to the Sweetwater Branch Treatment Wetland and then Payne’s Prairie. Stormwater runoff from MSWRF and adjacent properties flows through the MSWRF site and to the proposed project area.
The site of the proposed project is comprised of a palustrine forested wetland mixed wetland woods (Florida Land Use and Cover Classification System (FLUCFCS) 617). The Project area is bounded by the MSWRF to the north, SE 16th Avenue to the west and the Sweetwater Branch and associated wetland and upland vegetation communities to the south and east (Figure 4).
PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to discharge dredged and fill material into wetlands for the purposes of constructing a master stormwater pond. The pond would be a wet detention pond designed to manage the stormwater from the entire plant, including all current and future improvements associated with both phases of this project, as well as runoff coming from neighboring properties to the north and west of the site. The control elevation of the pond has been set at the seasonal high groundwater elevation, which was estimated based on the elevations observed at the wetland delineation lines at the pond location. The pond would include portions excavated below existing grade and above-grade fill to form the surrounding berm (Figures 6 and 7).
A total of 1.02 acres of unavoidable permanent direct impacts to wetlands are proposed from the stormwater pond’s construction (Figure 5) resulting from clearing and removal of native vegetation and soils, resulting in a total loss of wetland function within these impact locations. Secondary impacts include areas within a 25-foot buffer from the direct impacts edge of pond construction. Secondary permanent impacts would include a total of 0.41 acres to the section of the wetland to the south of the proposed pond (Figure 6). These impacts include changes to light regimes to the remaining wetland canopy/subcanopy, the potential for encroachment of invasive plant species from construction areas and uplands, and proximity of human disturbances to wetland areas.
The pond is part of a larger project being completed in two phases; Phase 1 focuses on improvements to the MSWRF’s preliminary treatment at the north end of the Project site. Phase 2 will implement improvements to the secondary and tertiary treatment facilities, as well as upgrade the existing operations building and new instrument technician and maintenance buildings. The master stormwater pond is included in the Phase 1 Project. The Phase 2 upgrades are currently in the design phase and would not involve activities requiring a Corps of Engineers permit, however the pond has been sized to accommodate the eventual Phase 2 improvements and associated runoff.
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:
Attempts to avoid wetland impacts included an assessment of potential alternatives. The existing plant has insufficient available space within the plant site for stormwater treatment facilities, and the poor hydrologic condition of the existing soil creates an environment that is inconducive to pretreatment via swales. Other alternatives that were explored included utilization of the Gainesville RTS stormwater pond north of the site or compensatory treatment on neighboring properties. The RTS pond was infeasible due to sizeable elevation differences between the proposed work and the pond, and compensatory treatment was eliminated as an option due to insufficient space on properties without existing treatment facilities.
Per Alachua County, developments shall adhere to creek buffer requirements. In the project location next to Sweetwater Branch, it is required that development retain a minimum 75’ buffer from the creek and shall average at minimum a 100’ buffer. In addition to the creek buffer requirements, GRU is also undertaking streambank stabilization projects along Sweetwater Branch to stunt the effects of continual erosion along the creek.
The wetland jurisdictional boundaries were reviewed and modified by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) during a field review on March 25, 2024. Modification to the wetland boundary by FDEP resulted in a 0.33-acre increase in the delineated wetland area within the GRU property parcel. The master stormwater pond has been revised according to an FDEP request for utilization of all available upland space to minimize wetland impacts. Its geometry was developed to utilize all available space within the uplands south of the plant site, maintain a minimum 75’ buffer from Sweetwater Branch, and provide enough available volume to attenuate runoff from all phases of the project across the entire plant site as well as neighboring properties to the west of the plant, while minimizing impacts to the increased wetland acreage within the property parcel.
To further minimize the impacts to the other wetland and surface waters adjacent to the proposed impact areas, best management practices would be used during project construction. These include the installation of silt fencing around construction areas just beyond the limits of clearing and grading to prevent soil erosion and runoff into adjacent features. The silt fencing would remain in place until the project is completed, and soil surfaces have stabilized. All impacts would be restricted to the aerial limits shown on project design sheets (Figures 6 and 7).
No operation of heavy machinery would be conducted within wetlands or surface waters outside of these aerial limits. All heavy vehicle traffic would access the wetland areas being cleared from the adjacent uplands. All clearing activities would take place from inside the area to be cleared. No heavy machinery or vegetation would be staged or stockpiled within adjacent wetland areas.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant has offered the following compensatory mitigation plan to offset unavoidable functional loss to the aquatic environment:
Compensatory mitigation is proposed via the preservation (conservation easement) of existing uplands adjacent to Sweetwater Branch owned by GRU. The approach was selected to satisfy the state of Florida, as no state-approved mitigation banks serve the watershed where the project is located. The Project area is served by at least one Corps-approved mitigation bank.
CULTURAL RESOURCES: The Corps is aware of recorded historic resources within or adjacent to the permit area and is evaluating the undertaking for effects to historic properties as required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This public notice serves to inform the public of the proposed undertaking and invites comments including those from local, State, and Federal government Agencies with respect to historic resources. Our final determination relative to historic resource impacts may be subject to additional coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer, those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area, and other interested parties.
ENDANGERED SPECIES: The Corps has determined the proposed project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), a federally listed threatened species. There is no designated critical habitat for the eastern indigo snake or other federally listed species within the Corps’ action area. The Corps will request U.S. Fish and Wildlife concurrence with this determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
The Eastern indigo snake uses wetland habitats for refugia and foraging, however its preferred habitat is primarily high pineland and flatwoods near streams or swamp edges (USFWS 1982; Mount 1975). These snakes rely heavily on gopher tortoise burrows for overwintering sites and generally occur in similar habitats as the tortoise (Mount 1975). It is unlikely the Eastern Indigo snake would be present within the proposed project area because of the lack of preferred habitat, the lack of gopher tortoise burrows, and the disturbed nature of the site. Standard protection measures for the Eastern Indigo snake would be implemented during construction.
Three additional federally listed threatened and endangered species were identified with the potential to occur in the Project vicinity including Eastern black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis jamaicensis), Everglades snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus) and red-cockaded woodpecker (Dryobates borealis). No preferred or associated habitats for these avian species were observed during the field surveys conducted on behalf of the applicant. The entire parcel is forested except for a small area of open water and does not provide roosting for foraging opportunities for these species. The Eastern black rail and Everglades snail kite use marsh and shallow open water habitats for foraging. Red-cockaded woodpeckers use mature pine forests for nesting habitats, which were not present onsite or in the vicinity of the project area.
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH): The project area is not associated with impacts to marine or estuarine environments. No potential impacts to EFH are proposed or expected.
Navigation: The proposed activity is not located in the vicinity of a federal navigation channel.
SECTION 408: The applicant will not require permission under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC 408) because the activity, in whole or in part, would not alter, occupy, or use a Corps Civil Works project.
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.
COMMENTS regarding the potential authorization of the work proposed should be submitted in writing to the attention of the District Engineer through the Los Angeles District, Ventura Field Office, Attn: Antal Szijj, 60 South California Street, Suite 201, Ventura, CA 93001 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, Antal Szijj, in writing at the Los Angeles District, Ventura Field Office, 60 South California Street, Suite 201, Ventura, CA 93001; by electronic mail at antal.j.szijj@usace.army.mil; or, by telephone at (805) 585-2147.
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.
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.
WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION: Water Quality Certification may be required from Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The project is being reviewed under FDEP application no. 01-0230101-001-EI.
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.