Title: Recommended Public Hearing/Notice Draft -1/2/87
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00000730/00001
 Material Information
Title: Recommended Public Hearing/Notice Draft -1/2/87
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Recommended Public Hearing/Notice Draft -1/2/87: Proposed Amendment 1, 2, 3, and 4
General Note: Box 7, Folder 2 ( Vail Conference 1987 - 1987 ), Item 6
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00000730
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text




RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87


PROPOSED AMENDMENT 1
40B-4.1020 Definitions



40B-4.1020(1)-(6) no change

40b-4.1020(7) "Contiguous wetland" means a wetland

which has a direct hydrologic connection to a water of the state

or work of the district; or, a wetland that has been determined

to fall under the jurisdiction of the Florida Department

Environmental Regulation pursuant to s.403.913, Florida Statutes.

40B-4.1020(8)-(25) no change

40B-4.1020(26) "Isolated wetland" means a wetland which

has-no does not have a direct hydrologic connection to a water of

the state; or. a wetland that has been determined to be outside

the jurisdiction of the Florida Department of Environmental

Regulation pursuant to s.403.913. Florida Statutes. Wetlands that

have a manmade hydrologic connection to a water of the state may

also be treated as isolated wetlands when they have been

determined to be outside the jurisdiction of the Florida

Department of Environmental Regulation.

40B-4.1020(27)-(56) no change


___ ___ _I____




I. ,



RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

PROPOSED AMENDMENT 2 A
40B-4.2010(1) General Surfacewater Management Permit for Certain
Agricultural or Forestry Activities



40B-4.2010(1)(a) no change

40B-4.2010(1) (b) no change

40B-4.2010(1) (c)l. no change

40B-4.2010(1) (c)2. no change

40B-4.2010(1) (c)3. no change

40B-4.2010(1)(c)4. Forest roads or agricultural roads

(excluding turnoffs, passing areas or loading areas) constructed

under a general permit shall be no more than 25 feet wide between

the banks o kf roadside ditches and no more than 40 feet wide

including roadside ditches. Roads which must be constructed

through or across wetlands shall be laid out so as to minimize

filling of wetland habitat and shall not cause loss of wetland

habitat in excess of the upper threshold for requiring mitigation

of fish, wildlife and wetland habitat identified in ss. 40B-

4.2030(8) (u)2.c..

40B-4.2010(1) (c)5. no change

40B-4.2010(1) (c)6. no change

















2








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

PROPOSED AMENDMENT 3
40B-4.2020 Content of Surfacewater Management Permit Application.



40B-4.2020(1) no change

40B-4.2020(2)(a) no change

40B-4.2020(2)(b)l.a.-g. no change

40B-4.2020(2) (b)l.h. A map of vegetative cover including all

wetlands in the project area and wetlands immediately adjacent

wetlands to the project (may be combined with e. above) and a

tabulation of the respective acreage of each vegetative type in

the project area. The district will accept an identification and

delineation of wetlands which is performed by applying the

methods for inventorving wetland indicator species described in

sections 403.817 and 403.8171, Florida Statutes, and chapter 17-

4, Florida Administrative Code. including the application of

those methods and wetland indicator species to wetlands that are

not under the jurisdiction of the Florida Department of

Environmental Regulation.

40B-4.2020(2) (b)l.i. no change

40B-4.2020(2) (b)1.j. The project area or boundary shall be

described by either a meets and bounds description prepared by a

surveyor that begins at a section corner and that section corner

is clearly identified in the description; by identifying at least

one turning point in the meets and bounds description by its

Florida State Plane Coordinates; or, by including on one or more

of the maps or plans required above that shows the project

boundary no fewer than two locations along or near the perimeter


i rrr~--L I --L-~------~-QlrTXPLU




N


RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

of the map or plan where the Florida State Plane Coordinates have

been determined by a surveyor.

40B-4.2020(2) (b)2.-5. no change








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

PROPOSED AMENDMENT 4
40B-4.2030(8) Conditions for Issuance of Surfacewater Management
Permits



40B-4.2030(8) (a)-(t) no change

40B-4.2030(8) (u)

1. General

This section refers to district review of fish, wildlife and

habitat impacts in wetlands. Nothing in this section should be

construed to limit in any way the authority of the district to

review other possible impacts such as hydrology, water quantity,

water quality, or flood hazard which may result from any project

that is subject to the permitting requirements of this chapter.

For the purpose of this section, mitigation refers to all means

considered acceptable by the board for remedying significant

adverse impacts to fish, wildlife and wetland habitats.

Compensation is a form of mitigation which refers specifically to

remedies required to offset unacceptable levels of wetland

conversion or loss. As a condition for issuance of a

surfacewater management permit significant adverse impacts to

wetlands will be either mitigated or compensated for in

conformance with the thresholds, criteria for determining

significant impact and mitigation criteria of this section, When

applying the conditions and thresholds set out in this section,

the district will include in its consideration the cumulative

impacts to wetlands which have been authorized by district

permits. When evaluating mitigation plans, the district will

consider historical cumulative adverse impacts, if any, to








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

wetlands in the project area. Mitigation, when required, shall

be designed to offset significant adverse impacts to wetland

habitats and fish and wildlife values of that habitat which might

otherwise result from the development if the mitigating actions)

is not taken.

2. Thresholds and Conditions for Requiring Mitigation.

This section establishes a minimum, an intermediate and an

upper size threshold and other conditions under which mitigation

of significant adverse impacts to fish, wildlife and wetland

habitat values may be required as a condition of a permit.

Regardless of the thresholds or other conditions established

under this section, mitigation will not be required when the

possible adverse impacts are limited to those resulting from the

discharge or storage of excess runoff required by ss.40B-

4.2030(8)(c) through (a).

a. Regardless of the thresholds, mitigation will be

required when impacts are determined to be significant and any

one or more of the following conditions exist:

1. A wetland of any size is within an area designated is an

area of critical state concern pursuant to chapter 380, Florida

Statutes;

2. A wetland of any size is used by threatened or

endangered species pursuant to s.372.072 or s.581.185, Florida

Statutes;

3. A wetland is an isolated wetland and it is smaller than

5 acres but it is part of a cumulative total acreage of wetlands

that are more than 30 percent of a project area;




6
- Ii


w.l III -- _____-___popopoo








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

4. A wetland falls under the jurisdiction of the Florida

Department of Environmental Regulation pursuant to s.403.913,

Florida Statutes (contiguous wetland as defined in this chapter).

b. Minimum Threshold. Provided the conditions in ss.40B-

4.2030(8) (u)2.a.1.-4. do not apply, the minimum size isolated

wetland that will be subject to mitigation requirements to offset

impacts to fish, wildlife or habitat values is 0.5 acres.

c. Upper Threshold. The district presumes that isolated

wetlands larger than 5.0 acres in size function as valuable fish

and wildlife habitat. The district further presumes that impacts

to wetlands larger than 5.0 acres in size will be significant

with resPect to adversely affecting fish and wildlife habitat

values and that mitigation of those significant impacts will be

required. Permit applicants must provide mitigation plans for

any such impact to isolated wetlands larger than 5.0 acres in

size or demonstrate that proposed impacts are not significant

impacts.

d. Intermediate Threshold. Isolated wetlands that are

larger than 0.5 acres and smaller than 5.0 acres in size may have

significant fish, wildlife and habitat values. For wetlands

which fall within the intermediate size threshold the district

will determine on a case-by-case basis if wetlands proposed for

development have significant fish, wildlife and habitat values

and whether the proposed development will have significant

impact. If requested by an applicant, the district will make the

determination in advance of application for a construction and

operation permit through the conceptual approval permit


_ I ~ L 1__1~ _I~_ L _








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

procedures in this chapter. Otherwise, the district will make

the determination in a time frame consistent with Chapter 120,

Florida Statutes; specifically the time limitations regarding

requests for additional information following permit application.

The criteria for determination of fish, wildlife and habitat

values of isolated wetlands shall be those criteria listed in

ss.40B-4.2030(8) (u)3. The district may request the assistance of

other state or federal agency personnel, or other knowledgeable

individuals in making the determination of values or significant

impact.

3. Determination of Wetland Value or Significant Impact.

This section establishes general criteria which may be

considered to determine if isolated wetlands exhibit significant

fish. wildlife or habitat values; or. if proposed impacts to

wetlands are significant impacts and will, therefore, require

mitigation as a condition of receiving a permit from the

district. The criteria also apply to determining if isolated

wetlands in the intermediate size threshold (0.5 5.0 acres)

have significant value and if proposed impacts are significant.

Unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the

board that impacts are not significant, the district will presume

any impact in a wetland larger than the upper size threshold or

wetlands that meet the other conditions set!out in ss.40B-

4.2030(8)(u)2.a. will be significant and mitigation will be

required.


-- --n








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC fEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

a. Landscape diversity.

The richer the redevelopment landscape diversity in and around

the perimeter or the wetland, the higher the fish, wildlife and

habitat values are for a given wetland and therefore impacts will

be considered significant impacts. Conversely, low landscape

diversity around the edge of a wetland translates to minimum

fish. wildlife and habitat value and therefore impact to such

areas may be less significant.

b. Quality of surrounding landscape.

The overall quality of the surrounding landscape refers to the

degree of alteration and impact of that alteration on the fish,

wildlife and habitat values of a wetland. Impacts will be

considered less significant when the surrounding landscape has

been completely altered by previous development activities and

the wetland is in a stressed state as a result of the historical

alteration. In areas where alterations to the adjacent landscape

have been minimal, the fish, wildlife and habitat values of

wetlands are presumed to be highest and therefore impacts to the

wetland will be presumed to be significant.

The district will only consider the components of new

development on adjacent lands that are subject to district

permitting requirements when determining if new development on

adjacent lands will have significant impact on fish, wildlife or

habitat values of wetlands. Components of the new development

which are not within the jurisdiction of the district or which

are exempt from district authority will not be considered.


-- -- C.~ I II- I IIA~lblka~PI.








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

c. Intactness.

Wetlands which have experienced significant historical

alteration by dewatering, drainage, invasion by exotic species,

harvest of forest products, fire or dredge and fill activities

may have low fish, wildlife of habitat values. Therefore, new or

proposed impacts may be insignificant as compared to similar

impacts in a wetland that has not experienced significant

historical alteration.

d. Uniqueness.

The scarcity of a particular wetland habitat type within the

watershed area in which a proposed project is located is presumed

to have great bearing on the fish, wildlife and habitat value of

a wetland and therefore the significance of a given impact,

Impacts to scarce wetland habitat types within a watershed will

be presumed to be significant impacts.

e. Threatened or endangered species.

Impacts to a wetland area which is used by a threatened or an

endangered species will be considered a significant impact.

f. Species richness or diversity.

The number and diversity of species which utilize a wetland is

a direct indication of the fish, wildlife and habitat value of a

wetland. The higher the species diversity or the higher the

number of of individuals which rely on the wetland habitat the

higher the habitat value and impacts which detract from that use

are presumed to be significant impacts.


~c~c*-~- I 1 14-~--- ----~~~




------------ ---



RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

4. Mitigation Criteria

This section establishes minimum criteria for evaluating

mitigation plans proposed by a permit applicant.

a. Unless considered pursuant to ss.40B-4.2030(8)(u)4.b. or

c.. mitigation requirements for significant adverse impacts to

wetlands which meet one or more of the following conditions shall

be on a case-by-case basis as approved by the board.

1. A wetland is in an area designated as an area of

critical state concern pursuant to chapter 380, Florida Statutes.

2. A wetland is used by threatened or endangered species.

The board will consider plans of mitigation developed by an

applicant which will restore, continue or maintain the functions

of the original wetland. An applicant may use mitigation

Criteria set out in ss.40B-4.2030(8) (u)4.b through d. ; or, other

innovative mitigation standards provided there is reasonable

assurance that the fish, wildlife and habitat values of the

original wetland will be maintained. In lieu of an acceptable

plan of mitigation submitted by an applicant and approved by the

board, such wetlands shall not be impacted.

b. For wetlands that fall under the jurisdiction of the

Florida Department of Environmental Regulation pursuant to

s.403.913, Florida Statutes, the district will accept mitigation

or compensation that is authorized pursuant to a permit issued by

that agency.

c. For lands and mining activities that fall under the

jurisdiction of the Florida Department of Natural Resources

Spursuant to chapters 211 and 378, Florida Statutes, that are to








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

be part of a land reclamation plan that has been approved under

chapters 211 and 378, Florida Statutes, the district will accept

as mitigation or compensation, any reclamation completed in

conformance with such approval.

d. Mitigation plans for significant impacts to isolated

wetlands that are not subject to the provisions of ss.40B-

4.2030(8) (u)4.a.-c. (all other isolated wetlands) will be

submitted by an applicant as part of a permit application for

district review. Mitigation plans will be reviewed with regard

to one or more of the foLlowing criteria:

1. Specific development or best management practices

proposed by an applicant that are intended to avoid or remedy the

significant adverse impacts.

2. Mitigation criteria developed by the Florida Department

of Environmental Regulation for mitigation of adverse impacts to

wetlands under the jurisdiction of that agency.

3. Minimum land reclamation criteria and standards

developed by the Florida Department of Natural Resources.

4. For lands that are proposed for development for

agricultural uses in accordance with an approved conservation

plan, the district will accept for review mitigation or

compensation requirements that are included in the approved

conservation plan.

5. For wetlands that fall under the jurisdiction of the

United States Army, Corps of Engineers, the district will accept

for review mitigation or compensation requirements that are

specified as part of a permit issued by that agency.


?:':' --rmna.~mnnraaarr~r~---i--~~--~"I"








RECOMMENDED PUBLIC HEARING / NOTICE DRAFT 1/2/87

6. Preservation of an equal area of wetlands, contiguous

buffer areas or adjacent uplands which might otherwise not be

preserved under the provisions of this rule.

7. Compensation of wetland acreage lost. Compensation

measures for isolated wetlands, shall be designed to offset the

actual conversion or loss (by filling, drainage or other means)

of a wetland habitat. The district will accept as compensation

the creation, replacement or rehabilitation of similar habitat

with an equal or higher function and at a ratio of acres created,

replaced or rehabilitated to acres destroyed of 1:1 provided that

such compensation is accomplished prior to or concurrent with the

disturbance of the original wetland. The district may require

compensation at ratios higher than 1:1 for compensation which

occurs subsequent to the disturbance of the original wetland.

For the purpose of this rule, there is a presumption that

compensation at a ratio of 1:1 with a similar habitat in the

project area will result in equal function. Likewise, there is a

presumption that compensation at a higher ratio or with a more

diverse habitat, including buffer areas or unique upland

habitats, will result in a higher function. Compensation will

require the establishment of pre-development hydroperiod (levels,

flows and duration). watershed boundaries and demonstration of

habitat viability over time.


_ I ~ __I~_




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs