7.3. LOCAL/SITE-SCALE IMPACTS The review of local/site-scale parameters is intended to assess potential environmental impacts that may have influence on one or more ecological communities in the vicinity of the proposed project. Potential design changes or alternative locations for proposed projects that could cause significant local/site-scale natural resource impacts must be considered, and, if necessary, the project may be deemed inherently incompatible. An EAP review will specify project modifications required for a favorable EAP determination of compatibility. Recommendations that go beyond the essential requirements will also be provided. An example of a local-scale impact would be one in which changes in wetland hydrology could, over time, impact wetland function in an adjacent marsh. Site scale impacts could result in loss of native vegetation, or the growth of exotic species that could reduce biological diversity near the proposed project. The potential must be considered for incremental impacts or secondary impacts that could ensue from proposed activities. Requirements and recommendations provided in the EAP report may go beyond design elements to address considerations including construction management and aspects of operations pertaining to conservation, such as waste and lighting. At the local/site scale, proposed activities on Jekyll Island must avoid, or minimize if unavoidable, impacts including, but not limited to:
• Natural resource management activities – The objectives outlined in Chapter 5 provide the basis for maintaining or restoring natural systems on the Island, and their success should not be compromised by future development proposals. The approach to management is built on a concept of managing relatively large tracts of natural lands. A proposal for a new development parcel that would segment, or fragment natural communities would be considered incompatible.
• Preservation of historic and archaeological resources – Proposed activities should avoid disturbance of known historic or archaeological resources and conduct a phase 1 archaeological survey for sites that have not been previously assessed unless deemed by JIA Historic Resources Division staff to be unlikely to contain significant resources. If phase 1 surveys discover significant resources, conditions of project advancement will be coordinated directly through the Historic Resources staff in coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the JIA Design Review Group. The EAP Review Team will defer to the senior staff person overseeing the JIA Historic Resources Division to determine when resources are sufficiently valuable to warrant protection, requirements for interagency coordination, and applicability of any state or federal laws in this arena.
• Natural hydrology and existing drainage basins – Alterations to historical drainage patterns have been conducted on the Island in the past, and opportunities for restoration of these impacts are suggested in several chapters of this Plan. Additional impacts to surface or groundwater flows, or proposed projects that would preclude the implementation of restoration activities to improve the function of freshwater or saltwater wetlands would be considered unacceptable local impacts.
• Water quality, with particular consideration of nutrients in receiving waters – Proposed development projects must provide a landscape management plan that will prevent high-nutrient discharge and a plan for treatment of other stormwater constituents that could degrade water quality, such as heavy metals, sediments, oil and grease, and pesticides and herbicides.
New development, construction, and renovation will be strongly encouraged to utilize Green and Sustainable Technology and, where appropriate, achieve certification through LEED, Green Globe, Georgia Peach or other environmental certification programs. Proposed development projects that do not include environmental certification must provide an explanation to the Design Review Group as to why certification is not practicable.
• The structure, composition and abundance of native plant and animal communities – Proposed development projects must minimize impacts to natural communities. These impacts could be direct, such as new development on a tract of existing natural lands. Or they could be indirect, such as when the development on one parcel causes a shift in vegetation structure or composition on an adjacent parcel as a result of the spread of exotic plants, changes in exposure to sunlight, or alterations in wind, salt or fire patterns. Though it is assumed that new development will cause the loss of some natural vegetation, these losses should occur along the edges of tracts of natural communities (and management units), not fragment existing systems, and minimize the footprint of disturbance, both direct and indirect.
• Wetland function and extent – Saltwater, brackish, and freshwater wetlands are identified as CPAs, and impacts upon them should be avoided.
• Local movements of wildlife – Proposed development projects that are likely to fragment otherwise intact natural systems would be expected to impact local movements of wildlife. Such projects should be avoided, or their affects minimized by specific design elements.
• Protected species habitat – Select habitats used by priority species are mapped as CPAs in Figure 7 (Page 90). These habitats should not be impacted by proposed development projects in any way that would compromise their capacity to support priority species. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 94
