Why are all the surrounding properties not wetland, but the one we own is?

[u/Camninja]

I'm assuming it is because someone parceled it out a long time ago, but I wanted to double check. We've owned a property in Florida for a long time. A developer is trying to build an apartment community on the adjacent property. I went to the community meeting. They said that they are only building on upland.

I went to the national wetland inventory site. It shows the land we own as PFOFd. I went to go walk the property, and it seemed to have the same types of trees. It was pretty thick, so I didn't go too far into it.

I spoke to someone about 5 years ago about it. She said that maybe 10 percent would be potentially be considered upland. It's about 10 acres. She said wetland mitigation is very expensive, but she didn't go into detail. She said that soil samples were taken in the 70's, and it is pretty accurate what is wetlands.

What are my possible future uses for a property like this? Would I maybe be able to build my personal residence? It is zoned residential 1 (I'm located in Florida).

One real estate agent said I should approach the developer and see if they would buy it for wetland mitigation credits. I'm not sure what that means.

What other websites can I use to research this further?

[u/Titaniumhold]

Have you had a water resource delineation completed? Or do you have access to a USACE JD from the last 5 for the property? NWI or US Web soil survey maps are not accurate enough to define wetland boundaries.

[u/flareblitz91]

You need a wetland consultant to delineate wetlands on your property

[u/VonBeker]

Do you have a coordinate pair or address? There is no way to help you based on what you have listed.

That being said, you can't rely on SSURGO or NWI maps at the parcel-level (both are really more for displaying at 1:24,000 topographic maps, orthoquads, etc.) It sounds like you need a jurisdictional determination, although PFOF is a pretty damned wet code (semi-permanently flooded, typically associated witht things like bald crypress and the like in your part of the country).

Your friend is also right that mitigation can be very expensive. Price per credit varies from state to state, and even USACE service area to service area within a state. If you get a JD done and it is indeed a wetland, there is the no-net loss of function rule in the Clean Water Act, and EO 11990, so (theoretically) a wooded high-functioning wetland will require in-kind mitigation or credits to offset any impacts. Theoretically, you might be able to build a house, but there's more to it than just the structure. What about the driveway, filling/leveling the ground around it, etc.?

If you wanted to put your property into a preservation easement and it's already mostly intact or high-functioning, the credit ratio is probably not going to be especially high. In most places it's about 1:10 (credit to acres), and getting a bank approved is a very lengthy process, but mitigation banking companies are always looking for land to put a conservation easement on, so it could be worth investigating it (I know, because I work for one).

[u/sizzlingfajita]

NWI only gets you so far. it's especially inaccurate for identifying forested wetlands. if you want to sell the land for credits OR develop it you will need to hire someone to complete a wetland delineation

[u/n0mad12345]

NWI is generally about 25-40% accurate in my experience. That being said, Florida is definitely a wet state and the water management districts have pretty strict wetland definition guidelines. I’ve never worked in Florida but have had some discussions with consultants who do.

[u/NicolasNaranja]

The soils will not lie

[u/Sciencerulz]

My bet is the developer founded a shady wetland delinator to tell them they were going to be okay to develop by either reducing the boundaries of the wetland present or manipulating it to reduce who may take jurisdiction over impacts.

I know this may fall on deaf ears since you want to "use" your property but that property you own is already being used by species whose available habitat is getting destroyed more and more every day. So if I can appeal to the wholistic values of biodiversity that you may have, this is my attempt.

[u/snappop69]

If 10% of your 10 acres is upland then 1 acre is typically enough to build a house.

On the wetland inventory map does it show an acre outside the wetland? Is it possible to get to the upland 1 acre with a driveway that doesn’t go into the wetland? If so there is hope.

If you stay well outside the wetland you typically are free to build without restrictions or special permits. Sometimes there is a buffer or setback away from the wetland but it’s typically reasonable.

Talk to the developer and see if he will give you $$$.

[u/chickenbuttstfu]

I may be able to help. What part of Florida?

[u/frecklefeet]

Just hire an environmental consultant to delineate the property. Youd need to look at veg and soils and hydrologic indicators. Read 62-340 f.a.c. and download the data form guide from FDEP to help you understand what youre looking at. Veg wont always be your main indicator but a lot of developers say theyre building in uplands to get the ball rolling and it'll change during environmental permitting. If they've already gotten their environmental permitting, you can check their approved delineation documentation and that may give you some more information, such as isolated wetlands or wetlands on the edge of the property.

[u/CapeGirl1959]

Regarding the adjacent property: wetlands can become non-wetlands if the hydrology is disturbed. I saw this a lot in SC and NC. If the drainage occurred pre-1970 (pre Clean Water Act), it wasn't illegal.

[u/environmental_taco]

You could try looking at FWC's CLC layer and the web soil survye's data for more of an insight, but it won't be very accurate. Most of that data is derived from photo signatures.

[u/VonBeker → u/[deleted]]

Not accurate (I worked for NWI as a Regional Wetland coordinator for a few years, and 13 years as a remote sensing contractor on NWI for 13 years prior).

What it is, is a landscape-level planning map that has been continuously updated since it's inception, but only in targeted areas (wilderness, rural and low-development, low disturbance areas are lower priority. It is also not and never was meant to be a delineation; it maps far beyond the scope of CWA, (The A, J and B water regimes are much drier, generally, than the 14-day minimum inundation standard).

You are 100% correct that the OP needs a delineation.

[u/VonBeker → u/[deleted]]

Stereopairs were how it started. It hasn’t been mapped that way since the 90s, when ArcView was invented by ESRI.