Published on: 8998416. The purposes and effects of the proposed rule amendments are to: (1) require ERP applicants under Chapter 40C-4 or 40C-40, F.A.C., to concurrently submit CUP applications where their proposed projects will contain irrigated landscape, golf course, or recreation areas that require a CUP; (2) require that such concurrent ERP and CUP applications will be reviewed by the District in a consolidated manner, with the ERP application not being considered complete until the CUP application is also complete and if either application fails to meet the applicable conditions for issuance then both the ERP and CUP applications will be denied; (3) create a new ERP criterion that a proposed system that will contain irrigated landscape, golf course, or recreational areas “not adversely impact the availability of water for reasonable-beneficial uses;” (4) create water conservation requirements, which satisfy the new criterion to not adversely impact the availability of water for reasonable-beneficial uses, including: (i) require an irrigation plan that meets criteria to conserve water, including requirements that no more than 60% of the pervious portion of a lot can be irrigated with high-volume sprinklers, sprinkler spacing and precipitation rate limits, prohibiting irrigation of non-vegetated areas, limiting irrigation of landscaped road medians to certain highly efficient irrigation methods unless the water source is stormwater or reclaimed water, and requiring that all in-ground irrigation systems are separately metered; (ii) require use of lower quality water sources unless the applicant demonstrates that it is not economically, environmentally, or technologically feasible; and (iii) require that the use of Florida-Friendly landscaping not be prohibited; (5) create requirements to ensure that the long-term operation and maintenance entity will enforce the water conservation plan requirements; (6) clarify that at preapplication conferences, the District will also be available to discuss consolidated review of other permits and authorizations; (7) require that when an ERP application requires a concurrent application to be submitted that the applicant must submit all required applications and all appropriate permit processing fees; (8) clarify the 40C-40 standard ERP process; (9) clarify that an ERP application may be submitted electronically via the District’s website; (10) update the nomenclature in 40C-4 that 40C-40 permits are called “standard” ERPs; (11) clarify that an applicant can request that the District begin processing an incomplete ERP application; (12) revise the ERP application form to update the contents and include the concurrent application requirements; and (13) update statutory authority.
Published on: 590068. The purposes of this proposed rule amendment are to (1) create the “Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin,” (2) amend and update the environmental resource permit (“ERP”) application forms to reflect both the new criteria for the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin and current ERP criteria and terminology, (3) create recharge criteria for certain systems located within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin that require an ERP pursuant to Chapters 40C-4, 40C-40, 40C-42, or 40C-44, F.A.C., (4) repeal from the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin the recharge criteria and “Most Effective Recharge Areas” (which areas will be superceded by the new Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin), (5) amend the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin rules to clarify which criteria apply within the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin and that the Wekiva recharge criteria only apply within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (6) amend and update the list of type “A” soils (as defined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey) that are located within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (7) update cites to reference guides on erosion and sediment control plans (including best management practices), and (8) create a legal description for the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, which is for the same area defined as the “Wekiva Study Area” in Section 369.316, Florida Statutes (2005). The effects of the proposed amendment are to (1) establish the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (2) make the ERP application forms reflect both the new criteria of the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin and current ERP rule criteria and terminology, (3) require applications to demonstrate that systems within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin either retain three inches of runoff from all impervious areas proposed to be constructed on type “A” soils (and percolating into the soils within 72 hours) or otherwise demonstrate that the post-development recharge capacity is equal to or greater than the pre-development recharge capacity, (4) delete the recharge criteria and “Most Effective Recharge Areas” from the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin, (5) clarify that the Wekiva recharge criteria will only apply in the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (6) update the list of type “A” soils where Wekiva recharge criteria apply, (7) update the reference guides on erosion and sediment control plans, and (8) describe the legal boundaries of the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin.
Published on: 305955. The purposes of this proposed rule amendment are to (1) create the “Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin,” (2) amend and update the environmental resource permit (“ERP”) application forms to reflect both the new criteria for the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin and current ERP criteria and terminology, (3) create recharge criteria for certain systems located within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin that require an ERP pursuant to Chapters 40C-4, 40C-40, 40C-42, or 40C-44, F.A.C., (4) repeal from the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin the recharge criteria and “Most Effective Recharge Areas” (which areas will be superceded by the new Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin), (5) amend the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin rules to clarify which criteria apply within the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin and that the Wekiva recharge criteria only apply within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (6) amend and update the list of type “A” soils (as defined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey) that are located within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (7) update cites to reference guides on erosion and sediment control plans (including best management practices), and (8) create a legal description for the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, which is for the same area defined as the “Wekiva Study Area” in Section 369.316, Florida Statutes (2005). The effects of the proposed amendment are to (1) establish the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (2) make the ERP application forms reflect both the new criteria of the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin and current ERP rule criteria and terminology, (3) require applications to demonstrate that systems within the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin either retain three inches of runoff from all impervious areas proposed to be constructed on type “A” soils (and percolating into the soils within 72 hours) or otherwise demonstrate that the post-development recharge capacity is equal to or greater than the pre-development recharge capacity, (4) delete the recharge criteria and “Most Effective Recharge Areas” from the Wekiva River Hydrologic Basin, (5) clarify that the Wekiva recharge criteria will only apply in the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin, (6) update the list of type “A” soils where Wekiva recharge criteria apply, (7) update the reference guides on erosion and sediment control plans, and (8) describe the legal boundaries of the Wekiva Recharge Protection Basin.