Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Wetlands topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Daggett County weighs Army Corps permitting, mitigation options for Manila trail project
Summary
County staff said a drafted county-signed letter will go to the U.S. Army Corps, noting that excluding a canal and wetland could reduce the project footprint to about 0.3 acres but would still require a Corps permit; commissioners discussed mitigation ratios and the feasibility of using sewer lagoons as mitigation sites.
Daggett County commissioners on Feb. 3 discussed permitting and mitigation options for a planned trail project near Manila and whether state and federal reviews can proceed in parallel.
County staff and commissioners said Rod is preparing a county-signed letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to accompany the project's permit filings. Unidentified speaker S5 said excluding one canal and one wetland from the project would reduce the area needing federal review to "about 0.3 acres," but that even that smaller footprint would still trigger a Corps permit.
The discussion centered on mitigation: commissioners and staff estimated a mitigation ratio in the range of 6:1 to 10:1 and noted the county must identify land that could serve as mitigation. "If we exclude those areas, we're down to, like, 0.3 acres," S5 said, and added that exclusion could avoid the need for a separate state water-quality certification in some scenarios but not the Corps permit.
Commissioners also asked whether existing county-owned sewer lagoons could host mitigation work. Participants raised technical concerns about using the lagoons because of "year-round water source" limitations and the cost to restore or modify sites to meet mitigation standards. S5 said the county will further investigate water availability and the reclamation cost if the lagoon option is pursued.
On timing, the commission sought clarity about whether construction could proceed while the Army Corps undertakes its review. S5 advised that staff should notify the state about intended work and that some state involvement (a 60–90 day review window) may be appropriate while Corps review is underway. The commission directed staff to contact state officials to confirm what preparatory or limited work can occur during federal permitting review.
The discussion produced no final vote or binding direction but identified immediate next steps: send the county-signed letter to the Army Corps, contact state water-quality staff for guidance on concurrent reviews, and investigate viable mitigation lands (including technical feasibility and cost estimates for the sewer-lagoon option). The county indicated it expects the letter from Rod within the week.
