Laserfiche WebLink
studies, weighed each factor relatively equally. However, SBS and IRCDUS staff agree that both factors, <br />"Population Density" and "Proximity to Surface Waters", should be weighed more heavily. It is believed <br />that these factors, at their worst conditions (systems close to surface waters communities with high <br />density), will likely cause a disproportionately higher impact to the environment. Consequently, each of <br />these factors, "Population Density" and "Proximity to Surface Waters", were adjusted by an <br />"importance factor" that ranged from 1.0 to 2.0. The 325 subdivisions were ranked in the order of the <br />overall score, where number 1 had the highest overall score (89.19) and number 325 the lowest (26.97). <br />Once the initial ranking was finalized, an Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost (OPC) was computed for <br />the top thirty five (35) ranked subdivisions. The top ranked subdivisions were further evaluated based <br />on the following factors: <br />1. Aquatic Health - Environmental Impact Evaluation or the Initial Ranking <br />2. Sewer System Evaluation and Cost Data <br />3. TN/TP Efficiency - Since most references and studies showed that Phosphorus was <br />removed by a functioning OSTDS, the TP efficiency computations were removed from <br />the analysis <br />4. Public Health - Based on the availability of potable water <br />The SBS study evaluated the total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) removed from the S2S <br />conversion for each individual area and computed a cost per pound for TN removal on the top 35 <br />ranked subdivisions. TP (as noted above) computations were removed from the analysis. <br />As part of the evaluation, average and peak wastewater flows generated by each of the top 35 ranked <br />subdivisions were tabulated. <br />By using the methodology described in the study, the top thirty five (35) ranking subdivisions have been <br />identified with the highest overall rating (largest potential impact to IRL) within the geographical area in <br />Indian River County to benefit from a centralized sewer system as follows. <br />Rank <br />Subdivision Name <br />Rank <br />Subdivision Name <br />Rank <br />Subdivision Name <br />1 <br />Floravon Shores Subdivision <br />14 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 <br />Replat PG 2 <br />24 <br />Dales Landing Subdivision <br />Tropic Colony Subdivision <br />2 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 Collier <br />14 <br />Hobart Landing Unit 3 <br />24 <br />Ames ( )—** <br />3 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 05 <br />16 <br />River Shores Estates Units 1- <br />4 <br />29 <br />Winter Grove Subdivision <br />4 <br />Hobart Landing Unit 2 <br />17 <br />Pine Tree Park Units 1-4 <br />29 <br />Kanawah Acres <br />5 <br />Orchid Island No. 2 <br />17 <br />Indian River Heights Units 1 <br />9 <br />31 <br />Tropic Colony Subdivision <br />5 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 04 <br />17 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 <br />Replat PG 3 <br />32 <br />Halleluiah Acres <br />7 <br />Orchid Island No. 1 <br />20 <br />Rain Tree Corner Subdivision <br />33 <br />Little Portion Subdivision <br />Replat OF <br />8 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 01 <br />21 <br />Diana Park Subdivision <br />34 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 <br />Replat PG 4 * <br />8 <br />Ambersand Beach Sub No 1 & 2 <br />22 <br />Verona Estates Subdivision <br />35 <br />Heritage Trace at Hobart* <br />10 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 03 <br />22 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 13; <br />Little Portion Subdivision <br />Replat Of <br />11 <br />Sebastian Highlands Unit 02 <br />24 <br />Hobart Landing Unit 1 <br />11 <br />Naranja TR Shellmound Bch Replat of POR <br />24 <br />Hallmark Ocean Subdivision <br />13 i <br />Orchid Isle Estates Subdivision <br />24 <br />Stevens Park Unit 1 & 2 <br />* These communities are included in the evaluation due to their proximity to one or more top 30 ranked <br />communities. <br />** It is recommended that the Amos subdivision not be considered in the capital improvement program. Ranking <br />results are due to an anomaly in the methodology. <br />Attachment 2 <br />\\10.176.2.252\granicus_nas\insite\files\IRCG\Attachments\579debbe-7f6f-46be-a910-53 aa2b098132.doc 212 <br />