|
Box 47 PACE 451
<br />lt is really a shame that the County did not see fit to purci .-Yse
<br />►Q 55 -acre impoundment just east of the roadway when they had a
<br />i..irnce to acv_uire it. For $175,000 they could have obtained a
<br />.i2-shland perk with considerable potential for public use and at
<br />ec: sane time avoided the tremendous problems that private ownership
<br />now causing and certainly will cause in the near future.
<br />Back in July 1979 Mr. Lyons wrote "It was decided that one or
<br />.010 bridge sections would be substituted for a box culvert near
<br />ie northern end (North Canal) of the road in order to protect the
<br />-tlands and to provide for future drainage requirements." I note
<br />-at that bridge has now been replaced by a smaller -sized culvert.
<br />.iiy? When this project first came under~ discussion we were assured
<br />u,t the road would not continue in the r}arshlands north of Barber
<br />. Vc-liue. Now, Commissioner t.odke is saying that lie believes Indian
<br />,:r Boulevard will eventually connect to U.S. 1 north of Barber Ave.
<br />Speaking of Barber Avenue, why does the Barber Avenue connection
<br />7
<br />Indiaii River Boulevard shots, or appe;-.r to show, on the design
<br />+ an extension eastwarl beyonki Inti i;1:A River I3oulevarci? l:ho is
<br />to benefit frca.i this conn(.cLion? is the public paying; for
<br />r"jad extension Callose only function is to encourage more wetland
<br />+: c loTialent?
<br />:peaking to this issue of encourage:hent of wetland development by.
<br />!i.lic bodies at public expense, the conments of City Manager John
<br />at a special session of the. County Commission on 114ay I alarm
<br />,;neatly. Mr. Little hoped that the .,rid -e across the main canal
<br />designed to suppert a water- -m.dad if it wasn' 1=, the city
<br />.01.,ld put a water rain on support structures across the canal." :f
<br />is to be a matter of public policy to discourage development in
<br />-ire wetlands in order to obtain state and federal permits to build
<br />:)ridge in the wetlands, then why are we planning to route a water
<br />.i.a along this highway?
<br />f you really want the DER and the Corps of Engineers to approve
<br />�c?.:3 permit, then you are going to have to include some mitigating
<br />ti,tures to compensate for the loss of wetland incurred by the road.
<br />.'e inclusion of structures that prevent restoration of tidal flow'
<br />�ikl natural drainage are self-defeating. If the threat of lawsuits
<br />t_:te reason you have taken this action, then why haven't your
<br />:
<br />..)rnPys been making an effort to obt..+in a legal ruling on this
<br />her? These natural marshes wore diked at public expense for
<br />public: benefit - mosquito cont.rol.., 1f the landowners no longer
<br />ire this public benefit, then le t-1
<br />l:>re ,-,ch those dikes and restore
<br />conditions to the land.
<br />Mr. Houl.lhan }gas indicatec! that j1nz1l local governments must make
<br />:e�rer�l detcrc�in.�tio2ls rc��c+r.e_in t;iz i)roposed construction prior to
<br />ticting on the permit applic--Itlon. -ane of these, Determination No.4
<br />:Mates "That no material or m,-.)netar}, injury will result to adjoin-
<br />ing lands" and antler, Deterrrinat. Lon 'No. 5 concerns interference
<br />with the conservation of fisia, marina and v i..l_dliie. I ti:ink you
<br />find yourselves on the horns of a 'i.lrnnma. Until you ol,t:din z
<br />:;uund legal opinion concernirc, :;'.ze �;,L.� or n:,t naterial or iranetary
<br />;_rdury *,rill result to7d'oini::z; by re:;I.orin� natural drain -
<br />and tidal flow into o. ncr ;�iosiiuiro control itapoundmcnt:.., you
<br />:ally ca2u-iot make this det; n �121�t 1+�s1. If, just to play it safe
<br />-.1n this point you clecide that you tiili not risk t.lis inju.•y, you
<br />.:ill then not incornrate any cf the mitigating actions outl `ued in
<br />te:im E of the DF.'t� s Biological cn- i-ater -,utility :assessment, in
<br />of f ect rejecting he DER) s roco"ri' c',n i�il.ions.
<br />If this should be your aci_ion a:, .i You ap-)rove the permit applica-
<br />tion ;3s presently designed, l pre(iit.tthat it will be fatal to the
<br />o�roject. As it is now desit,ned i; w-111 cause positive drainage of
<br />riearby weVl.and5, and neith�,r ...lv- ; t. s; or th,,! DEIN will iss-,e a per-
<br />:iiit to do that, unless they w;jnt to :;111)ject thetnse,lves to a court
<br />,,h allenge.
<br />— _. M
<br />_I
<br />
|