9/14/1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SEP 141991 47 mrx 421 Assuming that emergency access is found to be sufficient justification for this project, we have observed the following decisions regardiag Mitigation for habitat losses incurred: 1) Three sets of culverts, at approximate stations 364, 387, and 388, which were intended to provide tidal flow to impounded wetlands, will have flapgates installed at their downstream ends. These flapgates will riot only prevent such tidal flow into the Impoundments, but will provide positive drainage for these ukrdeveloped wetlands. These areas were, historically, high salt marsh and ;�:. <<,re�.. �:^} lets �..,hich were impounded to provide effective mosquito control. 2) A pair of double -pipe culverts at approximate stations 375 and 387 are to be plugged, thereby precluding tidal flow which was their intended function. 3) The box culvert at approximate station 372, modified to provide adequate drainage for the existing County Club Pointe subdivision, will have a weir constructed at 3 feet MSL, also effectively preventing tidal flow into the impoundment except during major storm events. 4) The County originally proposed to purchase all the land west of the road alignment to the City limits. Extensive mitigation was proposed for this purchase area, including scraping down•• existing back dikes and other fill, and improving tidal flow. through these wetlands. Proposed land acquisition is now limited to the necessary right-of-way limits, and much of the recommended mitigation has been delected as unnecessary or cost -prohibitive. 5) The proposed extension of Barber Avenue continues 200-300 feet eastward of its junction with Barber Avenue. Considering the evolution of this project in the last 2 years, it is realistic to visualize the eventual extension of Barber Avenue to the Indian River shoreline, thereby providing access to additional undeveloped wetlands, and raising the spectre of a new bridge across the Indian River. 6) Lateral drainage ditches along the roadway and within the impounded wetlands could accelerate drainage of rainwater out of the impoundments via the aforementioned flapgates. 7) The county has apparently determined that they will be compelled to provide highway access to adjacent landowners. This will certainly encourage land development in these historic wetlands. We believe these modifications have rendered this project environmentally unsound. With regard to obtaining City and County project approval as required by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, I wish to point out that these local. authorities must determine whether granting the permit would "interfere with ti -,e conservation of fish, marine, wildlife or other natural resources to such an extent that it would be contrary to the public interest." Furthermore, the "biological survey commissioned by the FDER shall be read into the record and duly considered in making the required findings of fact." We recognize. and apprecia Le local ,,overnmeut ° s interest in avoiding lagal suits with regard to re-establislii.--;t of tidal flow in these irupounded wetlands.. We believe, irowe v( r, that there is adequate legal precedent and environmental expertise cvallable in this community to overcome such potential obstacle,. Cor.v • Fely, to refrain from pursuing appropriate mitigative mcj5urer,, to pro i;_e positive drainage for privately— ou,ned wetlands at public expense; and t_-, eiiectivcly endorse development of historically intertidal salt -marsh ha)itats would surely, 'precipitate legal action by concerned citizens and srganizations. - v 4M.