Title: Memorandum: Currents Rules Status on 40C-4, 40C-40, 40C-41 (Wekiva Basin)
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00000740/00001
 Material Information
Title: Memorandum: Currents Rules Status on 40C-4, 40C-40, 40C-41 (Wekiva Basin)
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: SJRWMD
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Memorandum: Currents Rules Status on 40C-4, 40C-40, 40C-41 (Wekiva Basin), December 29, 1986
General Note: Box 7, Folder 2 ( Vail Conference 1987 - 1987 ), Item 16
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00000740
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




-'
Henry Dean, Executive Director
WATER Mildred G. Horton, Deputy Executive Director
s,... .-... MANAGEMENT
SGISTRICET POST OFFICE BOX 1429 PALATKA, FLORIDA 32078-1429
904/328-8321
SE 0 RY AN D U M FOR 86-448


DATE: December 29, 1986

TO: 400-4 Mailing List

FROM: R. Dirk Schmidt, Director
Office of Rules & Policy Development

RE: Current Rule Status on 40C-4. 40C-40, 40C-41 (Wekiva Basin)


On January 13, 1987 at 10:00 a.m. the Governing Board will hold workshops
for its 40C-4 and Wekiva Basin Rules (400-41). You have been previously
mailed the 400-4 rule handbook and draft changes. For the purposes of the
workshop there will be no new draft although staff has reviewed public
comments and will be making recommendations to the Board to publish a hear-
ing draft during their regular meeting on January 14, 1987.

Additionally, the Board will be asked to publish a hearing draft on the
Wekiva rule at the January 14th meeting as well. You will note that there
are some changes on the Wekiva rule (400-41) and the deletion of the setback
language.

You will also find a preliminary draft of the changes to the 400-4
Applicants Handbook to facilitate the handling of isolated wetlands. As
currently envisioned the threshold for isolated wetlands will not change.
The changes made to the handbook are additional criteria that must be met
for isolated wetlands. The District's mitigation language is also.included
in this draft. The isolated wetland changes will be discussed at the
February workshops in Vero Beach.

Finally, meetings held on the 13th and 14th of January will be held in our
Palatka headquarters, starting at 10:00 a.m. The regular Governing Board
meeting will start at 8:30 a.m. on the 14th of January, 1987 but the agenda
items on the workshop recommendations will not be addressed before 10:00
a.m.

Follow up workshops will take place in February 1987 on the 10th and llth at
Vero Beach. This will include isolated wetlands. The workshops will begin
at 9:30 a.m. on the 10th of February and Board recommendations will be made
on the llth of February after the regular meeting begins at 9:30 a..m.

The Vero workshops will be held in the 1st floor conference room of the
County Administrative Building on 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach. If you need
further instructions, the Administrative Building telephone is 305-567-8000.
If you need additional copies of the rule or have any questions regarding
scheduling please contact me, or Ms. Sue Carr at 904-328-8321.

RDS/sec

RALPH E. SIMMONS JIM T. SWANN LYNNE CAPEHART JOHN L MINTON
Chalmn Fernanina Beach Vice Cheirmn Cocoa Secretary Gainesville Treasurr Vero Beach
H. OWEN, JR. FRANCES S. PIGNONE KELLEY R. SMITH, JR. SAM L SWETT SAUNORA H. GRAY
ke ivnille Orlando Palatka Jacksonville oDeary


IDWALI
Jac


___










Revised 12-29-86
F.O.R. 86-416

RULES

OF THE

ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

CHAPTER 40C-41

SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT BASIN CRITERIA


40C-41.011
40C-41.023
40C-41.033
40C-41.043
40C-41.063


Policy and Purpose
Basin Boundaries
Implementation
Application of Chapter
Conditions for Issuance of Permits


Additions are m 1dexlned. Deletions are [bracketed] and struck
through.










40C-41.011 Policy and Purpose.

The rules in this part establish additional surface water
management criteria for the Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin1
[and-thej Oklawaha River hydrologic Basin a5dn_~b~H iyBiir
BydrloJgicSiBajD which insure that development within the basins
incorporates the appropriate water quantity and water quality
control measures necessary to protect the integrity of the public
investments in the basins and which minimizes adverse impacts to
the water resources of-the District. Criteria delineated in this
Chapter are in addition to criteria specified in Chapters 40C-4 and
40C-40, Florida Administrative-Code.. The criteria, exemptions and
additional requirements specified in this part are not intended to
supersede or rescindthe terms and-conditions of any valid surface;
water management permit issued by the District prior to the effec-
tive date of this Chapter.

Specific Authority: 373.044, 373.113, 373.171, 373.616, 373.6161,
F.S.
Law Implemented: 373.413, 373.416, 373.426, F.S.
History--New (12-7-83)

40QC-4J.023 Rasin Boundaries.

(1) The Upper St. Johns River- Hydrologic Basin is that area.
generally depicted in Figure 41-1 and, defined in
Applicant's Handbook, Appendix K as incorporated by
reference in Section 4DC-4.091, Florida- Administrative
Code-

(2) The Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin is that area
generally depicted in Figure 41-1 and defined in
Applicant's Handbook, Appendix K as incorporated by
reference in Section 40C-4.091, Florida Administrative
Code.

131--IThe-IJsekla-RBiuerBydrj;19919Basaias_.bataxes geneially
siPtfedinEiaure_4:lafld4defined-inApplicantls
BaBdbooks^.Appefldij_.Lat.inDCorporatedLteho terf a^ce in,
SJ;Aion-a4P C-4 DSll orildaAdminaoisttiaJrs-Cflds
Specific Authority: 373.044, 373.113, 373.616, 373.6161, F.S.
Law Implemented: 373.413, 373.416, 373.426, F.S.
History--New (12-7-83).

40C-41.033 Implementation.

(1) The effective date of this Chapter is December 7, 1983
rL and-r--ri --.--.Sa.-ti_4Cr4l631-l-a-d.121
fEA, and ____.___..._.._aa971_foIr_.ecIlfceria.pfr
Sfi5tion _DCr S41fl63131r.P.A*C


I









(2) If the validity of any provision of Chapter 40C-41,
Florida Administrative Code, as amended on December 7,
1983 d.----------........ or the application thereof to
any person or circumstance is challenged pursuant to
Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, or pursuant to any other
basis in law, it is the intent of the Governing Board of
the St. Johns River Water Management District that
neither a challenge to the validity of a provision or
application thereof nor the invalidation of a provision
or application thereof shall affect the validity or ap-
plication of other provisions of the rule which can be
given effect without the challenged or invalidated
provision or application and to this end the provisions
of Chapter 40C-41, Florida Administrative Code, as
amended on December 7, 1983 Dand- ....... .... 19i8 are
declared severable.
Specific Authority: 373.044, 373.113, 373.616, 373.6161, F.S.
Law Implemented: 373.413, 373.416, 373.426, F.S.
History--New (12-7-83).

40C-41.043 Application of Chapter.

All projects located within the Upper St. Johns River
Hydrologic Basin1 [el-the] Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin 9"Lj.e
Jabiya-.BrL.Byd~ogli3EBsiD requiring permits pursuant to Rule
40C-4.041 shall be constructed, operated, maintained, altered,
abandoned and removed in accordance with the criteria specified in
Rules 40C-4.301 or 40C-40.302, -and 40C-41.063 unless specifically
exempted. The most restrictive criteria will be applicable unless
the applicant provides reasonable assurance that the purposes and
intent of this Chapter and Chapter 40C-4 will be fulfilled using
alternate criteria.

Specific Authority: 373.044, 373.113, 373.616, 373.6161, P.S.
Law Implemented: 373.413, 373.416, 373.426, F.S.
History--New (12-7-83).

40C-41.063 Conditions for Issuance of Permits.

(1) Within the Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin the
following criteria are established:

(a) Storm Frequency--For purposes of design and
evaluation of system performance, both the 10 year
and the 25 year design storm frequencies must be
met.

(b) Runoff Volume--For design purposes, those systems
utilizing pumped discharge, the total post-
development discharge runoff volumes shall not
exceed pre-development discharge runoff volumes for











the four day period beginning the third day of the
four day design storm event.
(c) Interbasin Diversion--
1.. A system may not result in an increase in the
amount of water being diverted from the Upper
St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin into coastal
receiving waters.
2. It is an objective-of" the District to, where
practical, curtail,diversions of water: from-
the Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic:Basin
into- coastal, receiving ,waters.

(2) Within the Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin the following
criteria are established:
(a) Storm Frequency--For purposes of design and
evaluation of system performance, both the 10 year
and the 25 year design storm frequencies must be
met.

(b) RunoffrVolume-For design purposes, those systems|
utilizing pumped discharges, the total post-
development discharge runoff volumes shall not-
exceed pre-development discharge runoff volumes for.
the four day period beginning the third day of the
four day design storm event.

Law Implemented: 373.413s, 373.416s, 373.426s, F.S.

















11.0 Basin Criteria.
1&lBschastQ==Ibxaie-iDesQ.tfUQQnf cam-ll-diieatly

Etsistxe.Sasbst96rsas.

f lod. stmias syithin-ths-lQQ-9 at-flQQSalalD.Qi.s.

arSa.t&9mQ.Qatai-6bant-SQatrSe-Vl andabS& hb-sD3a
dire-5b-drlJ IP-thD-nDi-auf-i9iLittl-chs-Hdira

Specific Authority: 373.044, 373.133, 373.616, 373.6161, F.S.
Law Implemented: 373.413, 373.416, 373.426, F.S.
History--New (12-7-83).

Changes to 40C-4 Bandbook
11.0 Basin Criteria.









Chapter 40C-41, fACe, establishes additional criteria which are
to be used in reviewing applications for permits in certain
hydrologic basins. These basins are:

(a) Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin

(b) Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin

Isly.biss-1s^exByrxdrlasisDBaasin
See Figure 11.0-1 for a description of the areas contained within
the Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin [ nd-Fhej Oklawaha
River Hydrologic Basin and AWfki EigIe.BEIdrAikBIS_ D. A
description of the Hydrologic Basin boundaries is available in
Appendix K.

11.1 Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin

In addition to the design criteria described in
section 10.0 above, systems in the Upper St. Johns
River Basin must meet the following criteria:

11.1.1 Storm Frequency
System shall meet applicable discharge criteria for
10 year and 25 year frequency storms. On-site storage
and outlet capacity should be designed for the 25 year
storm. Outlet capacity design should be checked and
further refined, if necessary, for the 10 year storm.
(See section 12.9 for detailed discussion of detention
design.)

11.1.2 Runoff Volume

For systems-utilizing pumped discharges, the post-
development discharge volume during the four day *
period beginning the third day of the four day dura-
tion storm may not exceed the pre-development
discharge during the same period.

11.1'.3 Interbasin Diversion

(a) A system may not result in an increase in the
amount of water being diverted from the Upper St.
Johns River Hydrologic Basin into coastal receiv-
ing waters.

(b) It is an objective of the District to, where
practical, curtail diversions of water from the
Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin into coas-
tal receiving waters.

11.2 Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin










In addition to the design criteria described in
section 10.0 above, systems in the Oklawaha River
Hydrologic Basin must meet the following criteria:

11.2.1 Storm Frequency
System shall meet applicable discharge criteria for
10 year and 25 year frequency storms. On-site storage-
and outlet capacity should be designed for the 25 year
storm. Outlet capacity design-should be checked and
further- refined, if necessary, for the 10 year storm.
(-See section 12.9 for. detailed discussion- of. detention
design.)
11.2.2 Runoff Volume
For systems utilizing pumped discharges, the post-
development discharge volume during the four day
period beginning the third day of the four day dura-
tion storm may not exceed the pre-development
discharge during the same period.




Ined _itingo.a. zit als
Above, systems' jjin heWeki ier dr oloaic_ asin DmIustmee

'A~ell~lauPnsriQects

a&iss QBlaniQDS.QtBiQneSH.Ut._ESthSS
Bb^edl Stl zu. 3SStadSXaSSlQAD&SSf..DXSitef..LLSt
EfS5st.fci -Bba3er-se.an -haX-bdfiB-dfisedhY^-th.eD^^S.
EsolQsial-SuxY.& A xs bearbasYih... 1-:2.D be&.
IJ5bfhI3se-Pf-Xfelrs..EisUrs11^3r2-5bfa-.tbhs-ap-
thb akeJ1aizafassYiP

Sat~io-lBakBecinaJSSaa-96lS6S^.^Sisblisi
5a-JDi-3Hfist-sastec ixS-basgi Ai __l5.-bflp11st

Blica!nti aSthaY-llt ditilQals3eQta ioshnial
i~itssatfaiQD .stablliaybstbs rant-Dallit-is
withi ~ihEf ot EffstsB are* Arsex.

3iQ&.AgsWaSy5bi.. 9.b-SDDgmSScr-D19 s.D LA HA&sfa ais

9oi2zeyance^__SfpawatR; e~htbat_.2atf- ained austPbs
infiliatsed-iitQibs,QilQt-e6aSBrats.sh sa-ths


I








S f u tys:s 373as.04s4,37133 33i66i-l, 3 S.611lliFSs.
ist-aeaw2e73.

lilaJ.-L-as.tsm-sisia-D^sfa.us~e~.-s-~-sslDl-l
sfpQts-uf;ae-yl-lQ-^s~ea-flQQyet-QQlsD1^
fal..A-aats~maxgr~l-bdotma~-nas.astcfdasta-in199
atmassaQthQasthvs.19sssQt.1994isiasatsios
sts&na.9ahsaaxater~sonnaxhish.haas.Adrisniss

whishlasQ-iilsjastardais sisosn^EsLtion.aan-th


Specific Authority: 373.044, 373.133, 373.616, 373.6161, F.S.
Law Implemented: 373.413, 373.416, 373.426, F.S.
History--New (12-7-83).



fi.l-s-5l.l-tYprss-ithii-ost.et-fftis ha-Bbrase.Arms
Labsf.CfiUDtx
Asta~tulfl.Sand L~sBrlfi-trl^-ltDldA-tnl
PflsflSnSd.l1aBl-t-lEaDI


99~ala.Balition~al~P..9s
1 () Asta;alA.Sflld-JLAaBla.lAaDiilAtBla. lAtDl, na^lAB s
L8xB1
faola Sandfl__lEI[BlA-DlAa-lAl



Blantojnaie_5sand lBal^-lBfiledBe. lBxla-lllldla
1891
BlanDtfDan..Dad-5ts-..fi-5flda_-lBhl
Suaatfifi-l.fiand I-alffl J.IEbl
LahlsandfiesSand.JlLfA-LbleAllsllLdl^lbel
Drlanoda-iD sSand.lobl^-l0s1
St. _LUglaEleSa- Sand Ibl



slflDtfant .l.2se..Sfal3-lBfB-iBfCJt-cafPiBDla-lBl^ nlBD
Lsaeland-Fine-Sand,.-Lafli^-Lflel^lAMDI
Lhaseoaod.Sand-lLdaiA-IkdCl
SJA LJaBitti- eSand-1^S81











40C-4.091 Publications Incorporated by Reference.


The Governing Board hereby adopts by reference Part I "Policy
and Procedures," Part II "Criteria for Evaluation," Section 16
"Hydrologically Sensitive Areas," Section 18 "Wekiva River
Hydrologic Basin Criteria," and Appendix K "Legal Description Upper
St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin' [eandj "Legal Description
Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin" andLZi~f-iDjscriptQioD_. hbs
IJsAkixay B L.ydrlDagis.BDDSAB of the document entitled
"Applicant's Handbook: Management and Storage of Surface-Waters
December 7, 1983, as amended on October 14, 1984_and ---------."

(1) The purpose of the document- is to provided information
regarding the management and storage of surface waters
permitting program.

(2) The document may be obtained by contacting:

Director, Division of [Permitting4 Be.Qzrd
St. Johns River Water Management District
Post Office Box 1429
Palatka, Florida 32078-1429

Spe.cific. Aithoxity.r: 120.54 (8), 373A.044&,. .337.113, 3'73/..16U"
373.6161,6 F.S.
Law Implemented: 120.54(8), 373.4 37313 373.416, 373426, F.,S.
History--New (12-7-83) Amended 10-14-84 .


_
I~







STAFF WORKING DRAFT 12/30/86 DRAFT


[New Isolated Wetland Language per Legislature]

10.7.6 Isolated Wetland Criteria
Isolated wetlands are defined as those wetlands which are
not within the jurisdiction'of the Department of
Environmental Regulation (DER) as defined in Section
403.817, F.S. and which do not have a direct hydrologic
connection to DER jurisdictional waters. A direct
hydrologic connection is a surface water connection which
occurs in non-tidal areas on an average of 30 or more
consecutive days per year. In the absence of reliable
hydrologic records, such as nearby stage recorders, a
continuum of wetlands, based on soils or vegetation, may be
used to establish a direct hydrologic connection (see
Section 16.1 of Applicant's- andbook).
The District reviews alterations in isolated wetlands using
the same criteria as for non-isolated wetlands. However,
the District will not consider the off-site impacts nor
will the District require mitigation for the destruction of
isolated wetlands less than 0.5 acres in size, except in
the event that aquatic or wetland dependent species listed
as endangered, threatened, or of special concern (see
Section 16.1.6,b.) are found to exist in the isolated
wetland, or in the event that the combined acreage of two
or more wetlands, located within 300 feet of each other, is
0.5 acres or greater.









bPAFT


CSittl~is DBs~ibQdolgyB.ists tiQDS. iba appsiacant.Lr s-B ndboo


10.7.3 Wetlands (delete existing 10.7.3 and insert new language
below) .. ....
Wetlands are the highly productive transition zones between
aquatic and terrestial .habitats. They are important com-
ponents -of' the.water resource because they served as
spawning,, nursery and feeding habitats for. many species of
fish and wildlife, and because- they provide important flood
storage and water quality benefits. .Not all wetlands
provide these benefits, nor do they provide them to the
same extent. A wide array of physical and chemical factors
affect the functioning of any wetland community.
Wetlands are defined in Chapter 40C-4 as "areas which are
inundated or saturated by surface or ground water with a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that.
under normal circumstances: do support a prevalence, of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions-. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes,
-bogs, and similar areas'". This definition, also used by
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, explicitly mentions
inundation, vegetation, and soils as integral components, of
a wetland. Section 16 of the-. 40C-4 Applicant' s Handbook
describes the hydrologic, vegetative and soils indices used
Sby the District.
10.7.4 Review Criteria
In reviewing projects which entail wetland alterations, the
staff evaluates whether the development satisfies the
overall objectives of the District (Sec. 9.1.1) or causes
harm to the water resources (Sec. 10.2.1), both statutory
Requirements. Staff presumes that the statutory require-
ments have been satisfied if there-are no adverse off-site-
impacts to aquatic and wetland dependent species.
The assessment of off-site impacts is based upon a review
of pertinent scientific literature, soils and hydrologic
information, and a general understanding of the ecological
resources of the site. In most cases a field visit by
District environmental staff provides sufficient informa-
tion to evaluate off-site affects. Generally, site-
specific data collection is not required.







DRAFT


To obtain a permit, an applicant must demonstrate that
permitted activities must not cause adverse off-site
changes in:

(a) the habitat of aquatic and wetland dependent
species,

(b) the abundance of aquatic and wetland dependent '
species,

(c) the food sources of aquatic and wetland dependent
species.

10.7.5 Wetland Evaluation
A variety of wetland habitats exist within the St. Johns
River Water Management District and the off-site functions
of these habitats depends upon a number of factors. To aid
in determining whether a project satisfies the criteria in
Section 10.7.4 and in determining the value of a wetland to
off-site aquatic and wetland dependent species, the staff
considers the following factors:

(a) Size of the wetland larger wetlands generally sup-
port a greater diversity of species and have greater
value than small wetlands.

(b) Hydrologic connection wetlands having a significant
and regular hydrologic connection to off-site areas
are generally more productive, support more consumer
species, and generally have'greater value than iso-
lated or intermittently connected wetlands.

(c) Condition of the wetland pristine wetlands have
greater value than wetlands which have been drained,
harvested or otherwise altered.

(d) Unique wetlands wetland communities which are unique
or rare in a region may contribute significantly to
the regional diversity of aquatic and wetland
dependent species and generally have greater value
than a commonly occurring community.

(e) Surrounding landscape a wetlands adjacent to or
imbedded in one or more natural communities generally
have greater value than a wetlands surrounded by man-
altered habitat or imbedded in a single community.








DRAFT


(f) Endangered species wetlands known to support rare,
threatened or endangered species have extraordinary
value and will be given the greatest protection.

In light of the above factors, the District would place
higher value on a large, pristine wetland adjacent to other
natural communities or waterbodies than on a large or- small..
urban wetland with an altered hydroperiod surrounded by
urban development.
Section- 16 of: this- handbook described. how- applicants. may
mitigate for the'loss-of wetland functions. Every effort
should be made, however, to avoid.. destruction- of. wetland
habitat prior to considering wetland mitigation options.

16.1.3 Mitigation (New language for Methods Section)
(a) Mitigation for the loss of wetland functions will be
considered for those projects where the loss can not
be reasonably avoided. Mitigation is defined here.
as "action or actions taken to offset the adverse
effects of a project on off-site functions>n..
Mitigation- for the loss of off-site functions can
consist of- wetland creation or wetland enhancement._
Wetland creation means the construction of a func- f
tional wetland in what was an upland area.. Wetland
enhancement means the improvement of the ecological
value of an existing wetland.

The ecological value of a wetland can be enhanced by
altering its hydroperiod, increasing the hydrologic
connection to off-site areas, by increasing the
effective size of the wetland through the use of
wildlife corridors, or by improving the habitat
adjacent to or surrounding the wetland. -Because the
evaluation of wetland enhancement proposals is
dependent upon site-specific factors, proposals will
be considered on a case-by-case basis.

(b) ff=fisM.iiLatiiD The District prefers that
mitigation take place on-site or in close proximity
to the wetland loss. Situations may occur, however,
where it is appropriate to perform mitigation ac-
tivities off-site. In reviewing these proposals,
the staff will consider the benefits and disad-
vantages to the regional ecology as opposed to the
local on-site ecology.


/ .:







DRAFT

(c) FuD9ncgitAngiJ sati9D The District prefers that
wetland creation or enhancement restores the type of
functions lost due to the wetland impact, i.e.,
water quality, fish habitat, wading bird habitat,
etc. The simplest way to do this is through the
creation or enhancement of the same type of wetland.
There may be situations where it is appropriate to
create or enhance different type of wetl-and .to--- --
improve the local or regional ecology. The District
will accept such proposals when the applicant has
clearly demonstrated the benefit to the local or
regional ecology.

(d) Ij5lafed/I'holrxfiD~dy^ onj5ostljd
The destruction of wetlands which are contiguous to
off-site wetlands or waterbodies causes greater off-
site impacts than the destruction of an isolated,
wholly-owned wetland. Destruction of wetlands not.
wholly owned by the applicant is often prohibited
due to the adverse effects on the off-site portions
of the wetland community. Destruction of small,
isolated, wholly owned wetlands is usually allowed.
The destruction of large isolated, wholly owned
wetlands may require mitigation, although usually
Snot as much as.indicated in section 16.1.4 for
contiguous wetlands.

Destruction of isolated, wholly owned wetlands which
serve as important breeding or feeding habitat for
off-site aquatic and wetland dependent species may
be prohibited.

(e) TransiiaalDplaDOS
The preservation of transitional upland habitat,
adjacent to preserved or enhanced wetlands, may be
considered as partial mitigation because of the
value of these areas to the ecology of those aquatic
and wetland dependent species which do not spend
their entire life cycle in the wetland or aquatic
habitat, e.g., frogs, toads, turtles, salamanders,
wading birds, etc.

16.1.4 The following guidelines should be used to estimate the
extent of wetland creation which might be required for the
destruction of a unit of contiguous (not wholly owned)
wetland. These guidelines-are for preliminary planning


J









DR^

purposes only and the actual extent of wetland creation may
be more or less depending on staff evaluation of site and
regional conditions. The following ratios apply to wetland
creation (Da slldSDbanssuD^) proposals.
(a) 2aaiijozda pdha ppp
ssssiEum9-219lsiil 1 tiQ is QSl The ratio of--
created wetland to lost wetland should-be 2:1 to 5:1
depending on site-specific factors. If the wetland
proposal depends extensively on- natural: recoloniza-
tion the. ratio may be higher,
(b) SEltfaBma~rsb _andeshwaj.majhe The ratio
of created wetland to lost wetland should be 1.5:1
to 2:1. If the wetland creation proposal depends
extensively on natural recolonization the ratio may
be 3:1 to 4:1.

16-.1-5 Mitigation Proposals

Mitigation. proposals may be- approved in concept with a
Permit.for- Conceptual Approval. Detailed proposals must be-
submitted with individual or general permits and must
include monitoring and maintenance plans for the.created or -I.
enhanced wetland. In addition to the monitoring and main-
tenance plans, mitigation proposals should include:
(a) A description of the type and function of the wet-
land being altered including area, vegetative
community and hydrologic regime.
.(b) A list of all aquatic or wetland dependent plant or
animal species designated as endangered,- threatened
or of special concern (pursuant to Section 581.185,
EIfiiadStaf~t and Rules 39-27.03, 39-27.04, and
39-27.05, 1Drl A.Adiniztza ired), which util-
ize or can be expected to utilize. the ar.ea.

(c) Topographic information and soils classification for
the existing wetland.
(d) A description of the proposed wetland alterations,
e.g., aerial extent of fill or excavation or change
in hydroperiod or drainage practices.







DRAFT


Mitigation proposals must contain a description of the
wetland community to be created or enhanced as a result of
the mitigation activity, and must include descriptions of:

(a) Area and location
(b) Species to be planted
(c) Plant density
(d) Source of plants or mulch
(e) Proposed hydroperiod
(f) Effects on local and regional ecology and faunal
diversity
(g) Maintenance methods

16.1.7 Alternatives
Innovative proposals which deviate from the standards
described in this handbook which may result in a benefit to
the local or regional ecology will be addressed on a case-
by-case basis.

The donation of money as compensation for lost wetland
functions is not an acceptable form of mitigation.


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