7/25/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C L.1 The applicant's biologist states that the impoundment wetland area is impacted as a whole and is non-viable for several reasons. Such a determination would make development possible subject to a mitigation plan. The reasons given to support the determination that the wetlands area is non-viable and, therefore, developable subject to mitiga- tion are: a. isolation from the tidal influence from the Indian River Lagoon; b. the disturbance caused by mosquito control ditching, C. a low diversity of wildlife, d. low salinity levels due to a lack of tidal connection; salinity levels are more related to rain fall. (see attachment #4 question #16 for details) The applicant is proposing two types of mitigation for the overall Copeland's project; this includes Phase II of the subdivision and these four lots. (see attachment 6 for mitigation liability for Phase II vs. the 4 lots). The applicant proposes to create 1.49 acres of wetlands to partially offset the 4.23 acres (for the overall development) of fill, and he proposes to implement a Rotational Impoundment Management plan (RIM plan). The RIM plan will provide increased tidal connection and salinity levels which will help eliminate exotics, increase animal population and diversity, and provide for better mosquito control over the entire 56 acre impoundment. (Please see attachment #5 for a draft of the mitigation proposal) The applicant must also receive approval from the St. Johns Water Management District, DER, DNR, Army Corp, and the Governors Sub -Committee on Managed Marshes. The applicant will need ap- provals from all of the above agencies and committees prior to construction. The applicant has had preliminary meetings with all jurisdictional agencies, including the Governors Sub -Committee on Managed Marshes. These approvals will require a detailed rotation impoundment management plan for the marsh area. The management plan will include the creation of new wetlands, improved tidal connection to the existing impounded wetlands, and a new tidal connection to the isolated brackish lake and associated wetlands. The mosquito impoundments will be platted as conservation easements. CONCLUSION: In summary, The Environmental Planning staff and the applicant's consultant have agreed that the mitigation plan constitutes a greater than 1:1 mitigation for the 4 lots involved. The proposed mitigation for the 1.26 acres of fill will decrease exotics, increase wildlife population and diversity, enhance mosquito control by providing better water control, provide permanent legal access and plat a conservation easement over the enhanced wetlands. J U L 2 5 1989 45 nor i `4 t 4� d'