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):
APPLICANT: Seminole County (Attn: Arturo Perez)
100 East First Street
Sanford, FL 32771
WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project site, including on-site preservation areas, totals 12.98± acres and is located in Section 20, Township 21 South, Range 31 East, Seminole County. The site contains approximately 2.53± acres of wetlands and 0.31± acre of other surface waters located within the Lower St. Croix River Watershed (12-digit HUC: 030801011101).
Directions to the site are as follows: From State Road 426, turn onto Slavia Road. Project begins at Red Bug Lake Road and ends at State Road 426.
APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 28.648141°
Longitude -81.237885°
PROJECT PURPOSE:
Basic: Linear transportation.
Overall: The goal of this project is to enhance traffic capacity and safety along the Slavia Road corridor. This initiative is driven by current and anticipated traffic projections outlined in the Seminole County 2040 Transportation Plan. The project will include the construction of a stormwater pond, improvements for safety and drainage, and facilities for pedestrians and cyclists.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The wetland system consists of a Mixed Hardwood Forest, a freshwater system. The onsite vegetation consists of red maple, sweetgum, Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), and elephant ear (Colocasia esculenta). The existing area surrounding the project area features an undivided 0.9-mile, two-lane roadway that traverses commercial, residential, and undeveloped properties.
PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to widen Slavia Road from the existing two travel lanes to four travel lanes. The applicant’s preferred alternative for this work would also include one stormwater pond, associated safety and drainage improvements, and pedestrian/bicycle accommodations. The preferred alternative would directly impact 2.53 acres of wetlands and surface waters and indirectly impact 1.07 acres of wetlands and surface waters.
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:
“Alignment alternatives for the location of the typical section within the project corridor were also evaluated; however, with the existing horizontal alignment, the proposed project will offset the existing roadway. Therefore, only the centered alignment was reviewed for this study, as the existing baseline of the roadway is primarily centered in the 100-foot R/W. All build typical section options require impacts to jurisdictional waters located along the existing corridor. Adjustments to the alignment continued to be reviewed during design to avoid costly business damages from the proposed ROW acquisition, such as shifting the alignment by Lukas Nursery to conserve their parking. During planning and design, input was obtained from the public and Seminole County. Based on the results of the engineering and environmental studies as well as the input, the recommended option of Alternative 2 (Typical Section No. 2) was recommended for final design. This alternative accommodates a maximum design speed of 45 mph and includes a 4-lane divided urban section with two 11-foot travel lanes and a 5-foot bike lane in each direction, a 15.5-foot compressed raised median, a closed drainage system that will convey stormwater runoff to retention facilities, sidewalks along both sides of the roadway, and a minimum of 100-feet of ROW necessary. This selected alternative provides the necessary improved capacity and safety improvements with a similar overall footprint and jurisdictional impact area to other alternative options.
The environmental impacts associated with the Build alternatives were evaluated during the preliminary stages of the design phase to avoid and minimize wetland and/or surface water impacts to the extent that would represent the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA) and still meet the project purpose and need. Further description of efforts to minimize impacts within the chosen alternative is provided below.”
“Pond sizing was based on the associated drainage area’s proposed impervious surface and required treatment volume for the basins. As required, the ponds will collect, treat, and attenuate runoff before discharging downstream.”
“Like the roadway alignment, as aforementioned, potential pond site locations were based on multiple criteria with regard to practicable design measures, considering the project’s need and the above-described confining facts. More specifically, these factors considered included: topography; wetland, surface water, and floodplain impacts; protected species impacts; cultural resource impacts; drainage and water quality requirements governed by the rules set forth by Seminole County, FDOT, and the SJRWMD; construction cost; existing development and availability; acquisition cost; and land use. Available parcels in the area are required for the proposed pond additions; the few remaining properties with potential for these sites are located along the existing corridor.”
“Pond 3 encompassed a larger area to include additional uplands to the east. Due to limited availability for ROW acquisition within the project vicinity, upon analysis it was determined floodplain compensation (FPC) for all floodplain impact areas can be compensated for within this larger proposed pond site alternative; therefore, this Pond 3 alternative was the most conservative solution and a separate FPC site was eliminated.”
“In summary, the proposed project planning and design has considered eliminating and reducing wetland and/or surface water impacts to the greatest extent practicable before an application, taking into consideration the project’s purpose and need and the above-described confining facts.”
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant has offered the following compensatory mitigation plan to offset unavoidable functional loss to the aquatic environment:
“The 2.53 acres of direct impacts to forested wetlands and surface waters subject to mitigation equates to 1.14 FL units, and the 1.07 acres of secondary impacts equate to 0.07 units for a total of 1.21 FL units that will be provided for the project’s mitigation. The compensatory mitigation will be provided through the purchase of in-kind forested mitigation bank credits from a permitted 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 will have no effect on the crested caracara (Caracara plancus audubonii), Eastern black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis ssp. jamaicensis), Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi), Everglade snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus), pygmy fringe-tree (Chionanthus pygmaeus), or the whooping crane (Grus americana). The Corps has also determined the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the wood stork (Mycteria americana). No critical habitat has been designated for the eastern indigo snake, crested caracara, or wood stork. The Corps will request U.S. Fish and Wildlife/National Marine Fisheries Service concurrence with these determinations pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH): This notice does not include consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service on EFH, as the project area is inland and not in the vicinity of waters that can provide such habitat.
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 Albuquerque District Permits Section, 4101 Jefferson Plaza NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109-3135 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. Forrest Luna, in writing at the Albuquerque District Permits Section, 4101 Jefferson Plaza NE, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87109-3135; by electronic mail at forrest.luna@usace.army.mil; or, by telephone at (505)342-3678.
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 the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The project is being reviewed under St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) program application number: 202702-1.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY: In Florida, the state approval constitutes compliance with the approved 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.