Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />40 <br />• <br />E. Paul has plans from Blue Cypress Recreation Area [Etat could be adopted, <br />F. While design work under this project may be basal on one of the above, the f inil produce <br />will be a new design, meeting all current code requirements (rather than simply re -using an <br />existing set of drawings). <br />Environmental Issues, Permitting <br />A. Lengthy discussion centered on permitting strategies. whether or not work under this project <br />should be combined with the other environmental permitting associated with habitat <br />restoration. <br />B. The final decision was to handle permitting of each site separately, without combining them <br />with tate habitat restoration prosect. <br />1) By permitting each site separately, the thresholds will be lower, and easier to meet. <br />C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service anticipates wetland permits for habitat restoration to be in <br />hand by this time next year. <br />S. Archeological Issues <br />A. A good bit of work has already been done in terms of archeologicallhistorical inventory. <br />B. Work under this project will take into account the findings of the prior archeological <br />services. <br />C. Florida Bureau of l-listoric ['reservation has areas " tied down". Commissioner Stanbridge <br />will provide master site file numbers. <br />D. Our only scope of archeological services will be to have Bob Johnson (and his staff) <br />available during [lye construction phase should any finds be made, <br />6. Site Development (utilities, access, pavement alternatives, stormwater management <br />A. Septic tanks and drainfaelds will not be an option. <br />B. Sewer and water service will need to be provided at each site. <br />C. Some discussion centered on the possibility of using shallow well(s) for service at the <br />Surman site, and providing water treatment (water must be of potable quality from <br />lavatories). However, it was agreed that the best solution most likely be to extend a water <br />line from the Kennedy site. <br />D. Since the surface treatment of JungleTrail will not be addressed, all sites will be accessed <br />from an unpaved road. However, Jim Davis was insistent that some type of surface <br />treatment was needed for each access road and parking drives (rather than using a motor <br />grader). He indicated that reports he has read state that more water quality problems arise <br />from unpaved roadways than those with surface treaumean. It was noted that perhaps <br />manufacturers of innovative alternative paving systems would he willing to provide <br />significant price reductions considering that their systems) would be considered as proto- <br />types for consideration as eventual solutions for Jungle Trail. <br />E. Grassed parking is the preferred type of tri atmertt for individual parking spnces. <br />F. Access for the north end at the Kennedy site will be across lion the Sea View entrance (to <br />avoid the acute angle it (lie north end of Jungle `frail). Although[ access will be planed this <br />way, it may be implemented [luring a subsequent phase of construction, with aeccss to the <br />Kennedy site being from directly from Jungle 'frail. <br />C. Infiltration of stormwater should be encourage([. Grassed swales would be appropriate, <br />although native vegetation is desired. (Note: vegetated swales may be considered for use.) <br />Page 4 <br />