Title: Current Rule 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/WL00000807/00001
 Material Information
Title: Current Rule Status on 40C-4, 40C-40, 40C-41 (Wekiva Basin)
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Water Management District Memorandum From: R. Dirk Schmidt, Director To: 40C-4 Mailing List December 29, 1986
General Note: Box 7, Folder 2 ( Vail Conference 1987 - 1987 ), Item 83
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00000807
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


ST. JOMNSl RIVER


\ Henry Dean, Executive Director
Mildred G. Horton. Deputy Executive Director
^-MANAGEMENT
-'DISTnRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1429 PALATKA, FLORIDA 32078-1429
*0 U^ >904/328-8321
MN E D U M FOR 86-448


DATE: December 29, 1986

TO: 40C-4 Mailing List

FROMt 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 meting 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 (40C-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 usmt 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 11th 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 11th 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
Chairman Fernandna Beach Vice Chairman Cocoa Secretary Gainesville Treasurer Vero Beach


FRANCES S. PIGNONE KELLEY R. SMITH. JR.
Orlando Palatka


SAM L SWETT SAUNORA H. GRAY
Jacksonville DeBary


IDWAL H. OWEN, JR.
Jacksonville









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 mDExlijDd. Deletions are [bracketed] and struck
through.









Policy and Purpose.


The rules in this part establish additional surface water
management criteria for the Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin.
[and-the} Oklawaha River hydrologic Basin ndfbhJ kiys _Biyzer
B YdQl l.g-BaZiD 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.- Ctiteria-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 thia part are not intended to
supersede- or: rescind thea 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)

40fC-41.023 Basin Boundaries.

(1) The Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin is that area
generally depicted in Figur-e. 4-1. and defined in
Applicant's Handbook, Appendix K as incorporated by
reference in Section 40C-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--Tbh5_HtklvaBiyerBydrjlogi-.BasAns that aiea_^nally

SaDbooklBAgppndix. Las. inc prorated_ by .efe ene_ i
9S 4tgoD_4.C 91 FYl2ridaAdminisatra3iyeCod
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
f.9 jAbctrandt la--Sectiona4Cri4 L6311lapdfL21gi
PFB C, and ____________._1952-flXtbs crijtejAa.9
SafriSn.fcn4lCrAlDS3131, fAAC.


- -


40C-41.011









(2) If the validity of any provision of Chapter 40C-41,
Florida Administrative Code, as amended on December 7,
1983 ald__ ____.---- B2 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 and ---------- _A-i982 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 BasinL [or-the] Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin r_ tbe
(' WEjiy_,BiyEyrlIS E.BaSin 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, F.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 p
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.

21- It is- ar objective* of the- Dstrict- to, where-
praotical, curta:il diversions. of. water from
the-Upplr St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin
intbi coastal: r.eesiating. wate

(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) Runoff Volume--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.

131--_i__ hD_ .thei_ lBisr_.By BydXol9ogicB3BinLbh.e_ fIlowing


MsSisai6s _tIBhSbsgi__








Specific Authority: 373.044, 373.133, 373.616, 373.6161, F.S.
eLaw Implemented: 373.413 373.416, 373.426f, .S.




History--New.(eh12-7-83).
lblSofiraors Axasystesmay, fntcausemastrduction ii





Changes to 40C-4 Handbook laxe ieand ba
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, E.C, 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


See Figure 11.0-1 for a description of the areas contained within
the Upper St. Johns River Hydrologic Basin [e*nd-kel Oklawaha
River Hydrologic Basin and~_~ eiAaLB er ydrligLS BasisD. 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 yeartstorm.
(Sew sectionr12-~!4 f^p:.'deita ied discusimarr 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.
11.3 -wiva Riv_8r Hydrofgig3c Basan

In.aditincn vba_,gdsin.crsii dscibdinScii .
aborx&-arstasyals&iD-t f kiss- Bim.BvzjfidrPlasJiasiBmus_ eSat _
the. fllowla.1itain r)



Besbasth_ asrea5_asat~eatai -thjrai5_ncbhes ofjxn ff. frfoxa
sb-dicioestlyPLsDDsteid-LB lsJeasMDel=site.lt
Bf22tiYBeBcbaseAreashmbaDeibas yde. fiedtbytb.DliS.
Ge nsicgsal-Surns,sas-at&saswhilb .]baass9lQ=2-iahcsasQf
Jfihfarse astafispf eajr^._Hff urtellA3=2-fif lKSh thbeap-
flasiajatei lcatin..9N _i-t TctcsiBecharz-A.s.A.
theafshklva.Basi
aStJeaijlB,1 _Cofntains-a listof isoil tYpeasahich sur
fouan~dD- i st-fEffeothye_ cssb3fAase thrass This, list
willl-beajsed-tfidatermine-wbetbhiat-asanprf ed pi sjet
iA^B-a-!ifiat.JJ5C29tlhfi-flSbrgfi-Arsea.- Als50Anap-
Plicants may, sjbaite idditi Dal -sstscnbJical
isrimation t;Pesaabllab-ywh:th LaDst asitstis
ithinhbe-JtsEt-Effectyin.JfhBszbarseArsefl^
Dirs5tl y-cfnnechedapejnv20nsParasranjretbose isper-
3la9s9si6s bi- 9-3ts-QDncsstedQ-19 Abs suarfsa6-yas
mDAnsEe DLBr-yBA bE.A.dj:Dj.ni-SimproatmB_MJJhb-AS_5
41itb^-rstmasisasavadcbaelsojrjlbe an=mands
sojavxQanc__5taXBaflterxtAbf.t-As-tfAed-nst e )
if DblJQafiZfcBi1theL soil o r_ ep rated such.. that.b














silSas-Qt-sber~r t-ersQnsaisebish bssa-drainess




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).

lQ^Q- Ss ia-kiz.Bissi-SLdt &-BABixDtltstl


LA-.CafiJty
AStf aftla-Sand._XAsBl.lAtBl .lADI Bl-Atn
8a9l S-and__8 1Bl2-XPaDl
DrasSadlTa~_lrT Li

9sl 9,_-atioal -Ea-st

Astatila5lfld..__iAda lalASDl _lAA.lAiAADl_ AuBla_
aof la Sand___EI~i.1BIDl-~_i l


Irans-COa
BlanIksflP-inAee-5nd_.lBalla11 11 -lBf^-lBfl lBfix-i Bble8l Bdl
BlaDnto3Dand_stfEin-D-S__da 181l
5uaftiS-fnir -Sfald _EalffllAl
LfhsalandFiDnSanld lLals-ibbLfLA-Lfflz-lLdl _lLae l
frlandoEinsiSflnd_ 1lblA-X0fl
St.,LiStsEin- Sand_ _lbl



Blanftalri-F SanSDd__lBfB.1-BfCl -1B^Dl-lBDfl-BD
LaSalaSf in e.San diLSLBlic--fll-iLDl
hatasewold Sal dlLdBI -2LdCl
S;t-LUris imA.SafDd_ 15fB1









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". [emwd "Legal Description
Oklawaha River Hydrologic Basin" Ad.Leal-Desc1piODD _Je
Wkiys.Biyrsy droIgsisBasi" of the document entitled
"Applicant's:Handbook: Management and Storageaof Surface Waters
December 7, 1983, as amended on O0tober 14 1984_Daidd .-----------_ .

(1) The purpose of; the document. is to provide. information
r-egaadirng theb mnagpset: and. storage zof subr-t waters
permitting program.

(2) The document may be obtained by contacting:
Director, Division of [Permitti-kng BfEicrQ
St. Johns River Water Management District
Post Office Box 1429
Palatka, Florida 32078-1429

Specific Authority:- 120.54(8), 373.04:4, 373'11-3, 373.616,
373.6161, F.S.
Law Implemented: 120.54(8), 373..413, 373.416, 373.426, F.S.
History--New (12-7-83) Amended 10-14-84,







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 Handbook).

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
6 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.


I







.. RAFT






10.7.3 Wetlands (delete existing 10.7.3 and insert new language
below)
Wetlands are the highly productive transitiorr znes- between
aquatic and terrestial habitats. They. are important com-
ponents. of the water, resource* because- they serve as.
spawning. nursery and feeding: habitat~ for: nmtmy species of-
fish- and- wildlife~: and. b*tusms they -provide important floo&
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& prevaLencea 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' I 6 of" the 40C-4- Applicant-s" Handbook.
describes the hydrologicr vegetative and soils indices used
by 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
Requirementss. 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


STo 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.


I







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
urbaac development.

Section- 16. of- this- hantbuok described hawv applicants. may
mitigate rr- the loss of/wetland funattins. Every effort
should. be made, however;, to. aroid 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 aspr.o ect: or- off-site functions:.
Mitigation fbr the loss of offsite functions can
consist of wetland creation or wetland enhancement.
Wetland creation means the' construction of a func-
tional wetland in what.was an upland area. Wetland- .-
enhancement means the improvement of the ecological
value; s of aa, 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 an a case-by-case basis.

(b) i_-iatiMnjigisa 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) Functional_ .tiglaton 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 -a 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.


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
not 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) TraAs6iti9DAi-DplIJDds
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








DRAFT


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 (Dn_. 9tlaDfndhabDHE ) proposals.

(a) MaDasiye -apsDand.ba.dw99_.swap5.1exPf-9r ___
SSOut.S iltEgij9 zVSi.iQSS The ratio of
created wetland to lost wetland should b&e2-:l to 5:1
depending on site-specific factors. If*thee wetland
proposal; depends& extensively, on natural recoloniza-
tion4 the ratio may be higher.

(bt Sita;grmsrsbs_ aDd.frsbwagemasgb 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
enhanced wetland. In addition to the monitoring and main-
tenance plans, mitigation proposals should include
('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,
E~;rida Sf a e, and Rules 39-27.03, 39-27.04, and
39-27.05, ~1 rida~Amiistrati cde), which util-
ize or can be expected to utilize the area.

(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.




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